This website is devoted to the extraordinary mystics and visionaries of the Church, especially those who are lesser known, such as St Gemma Galgani, Blessed Alexandrina da Costa, Sr Consolata Betrone, Therese Neumann, Rev. Pere Lamy, Gabrielle Bossis, Josefa Menendez, Marthe Robin, Servant of God Louise Lateau, Blessed Anna Maria Taigi, Sister Mary of the Holy Trinity, Sister Maria Antonia and others. The author endeavors always to be in communion with the Catholic Church and its teachings.

Charles Johnston and the upcoming Storm -An alleged prophet with a critically important message for humanity
By Glenn DallaireWe report; you discern.Update Jan 1, 2018: Concerning Mr. Johnston's alleged prophecies and private revelations, from early on this writer often commented that time and events (or lack of events) will clearly reveal whether Charlie's prophecies are authentic, or not. In other words, time will tell. Well, as of today (January 1, 2018) time has clearly revealed that Mr. Johnston's numerous prophecies have ALL been shown to be completely false, most notably his predictions concerning the Presidential election, the great worldwide "Storm" which he foretold would bring global economic collapse and civil strife, toppling governments throughout the globe, war with political Islam resulting with the mass conversion of most Muslims, then a war with China, and generalized global chaos resulting in 26 million dead, all culminating with the miraculous "Rescue" apparition of the Blessed Virgin Mary to all of humanity, all of which was prophesied by Charlie to occur by the end of 2017. In conclusion, since Charlie's prophecies have now all been shown to be completely false, he joins the list of recent failed visionaries whose stories have been highlighted on this site, such as "Locutions to the World" and "Maria Divine Mercy", and together they provide a strong cautionary warning for all of us in regards to purported visionaries and mystics of past and present, urging us to be very cautious and prudent in our discernment concerning such persons, reaffirming the statement and warning of St Paul of the Cross, the founder of the Passionists and great mystic himself, whom once stated that 9 out of 10 purported visionaries are false. Perhaps this estimation from St Paul of the Cross is a bit high, but then again perhaps not. -Glenn Dallaire---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Updated Jan 2017, and also in 2016 on Oct. 27th, Aug 28, July 2 and Jan. 16, and on October 17, 2015. Originally posted on January 1, 2015 -The Solemnity of the Blessed Virgin Mary, the Mother of God***January 7, 2017: See also update on Charlie Johnston and the "Presidential Prophecy"As the introduction of the home page of this website declares, this website is devoted to the Mystics of the Church; not only those who have been approved by the Church, but also those who thus far have not yet been approved--In fact, from the beginning my primary goal for this website was to help spread knowledge and devotion to the little known Mystics of the Church. And this mission, I believe, is still ongoing. So long as a particular mystic/visionary/prophet has not been officially condemned by the legitimate authority within the Catholic church, or has stated/published anything contrary to Church doctrine, then I am willing to publish their life story and/or their message here. However, as one can see by my articles on this website, I normally stick to writing about mystics/visionaries who have passed into eternity.With all of the above in mind, I have contemplated and prayed about writing this particular post concerning Mr. Charles Johnston for about a month. I have reflected upon and studied Charlie's writings and prophetic message since my friend Gretchen kindly told me about him, and his website, back in mid-November 2014.

Charlie Johnston during his 3200 mile pilgrimage

To be very honest, I have hesitated to write and publish information about Charlie here, because over the years I personally have had some very spiritually painful experiences with living visionaries/mystics, and am therefore very cautious and reserved when it comes to speaking or writing about such persons. Yet, at the same time it must be acknowledged that Charlie's message,if authentic, is extremely important for humanity, as it concerns the time period in which we are presently living, along with the very near future.

His prophetic message primarily concerns the salvation of souls during the "Storm" which according to Charlie is said to be soon forthcoming, and which will be overtaking the entire world. And so, after weeks of prayer and reflection, I will file this report trusting that the Holy Spirit will guide you to proper discernment.

By way of a very brief biography, Charlie Johnston is a 60 year old (as of 2016) Roman Catholic layman currently living in the diocese of Denver, Colorado. Born and raised a Christian Fundamentalist, in 1991 he experienced a powerful conversion into the Catholic church. He claims to have been receiving heavenly visits from Jesus, the Blessed Virgin Mary, the Archangel Gabriel, and other heavenly visitors since early childhood, that is for over 50 years, and has been guided in his prophetic mission for 20 years by three Catholic priests who are his spiritual directors. It is the Archangel Gabriel, whom Charlie calls "my Angel", whom has prophesied the majority of the events which we will detail below.Charlie suffered a severe neurological event at 9:03AM on Good Friday, 2003, which still affects him physically to this day. Although suffering from this painful nerve damage, from Feb. 11, 2011 to Aug. 21, 2012 he walked 3,200 miles across the country, sleeping in the woods, meeting people and praying as he went. Charlie states that is was God who willed that he make the journey, and so he simply obeyed. So that they might accompany him in spirit, a couple of friends suggested that he post updates of his pilgrimage on a Facebook page, which he entitled Abraham's Journey. The pilgrimage culminated in a partial climb up Mt Meeker, Colorado, upon which Charlie has been told by his Angel that one day a Shrine will be built. There is a very extraordinary reason as related here as to why he was unable to summit the mountain, but suffice it to say it was not God's will.

Charlie Johnston

Summary of Charlie Johnston's prophetic message for these times:
It is not for me to give an in depth analysis or commentary of Charlie's alleged mission and prophetic message for these perilous times in which we are living--I leave it to Charlie to speak of his mission for himself. If interested, you can visit his website entitled "The Next Right Step" here.

But here is a summary of what I personally have perceived the most important parts of Charlie's message and mission to be, garnered from in his writings and video talks:

The Storm
Charlie professes to have been foretold by the Archangel Gabriel of a "Great Storm" that is now coming upon the world which will affect all of humanity. To be precise, he has stated that the Storm started in May of 2009, but has not reached it fullness yet. Concerning this, he has stated: "I tell people that we have entered the beginning of the greatest crisis in the history of Western Civilization and their imagination fails them."
He explains that it will consist of a series of grave catastrophic events, one in succession upon another, each with progressively greater intensity and affect. He has described the forthcoming Storm as like being similar to a combination of the Great Depression and the Civil war all wrapped up into one, but each much worse than the original ones, because they will not be confined just to the USA, but will take place on a global scale. He states that Governments will topple, economies will collapse and currencies will fail throughout the world. He emphasizes especially also that there will be some "false dawns" in between the series of calamities.

One part of this predicted "Storm" will be that humanity will be at war with itself, like one great civil war upon the whole of the earth. Specifically he says "Our civil societies will degenerate into a global civil war fought along cultural lines". He states that North Korea is the "dragons tail" and while things will start from there, the countries to really watch for is most especially China, whom he calls a "bad actor". But, ironically it will be Russia that will eventually unite with the USA and other countries to help us in the battle with China at that time. The miraculous "Rescue" through the Immaculate Heart of Mary, which I will speak more about below, will actually come in the midst of this global civil war. The first initial battles of the Storm however will be with Islamic forces, which will eventually be overthrown, but this will be another false dawn, as the battle with China will then arise, showing the Islamic conflict to have only been a cub of a challenge. Charlie states emphatically that the allied countries of the West will not win the battle against China, but that they will simply endure until the great miraculous Rescue comes through the Immaculate Heart of Mary (more on this miraculous Rescue below).

Charles Johnston

In fact, according to Charlie the Great Storm will begin to enter its fullness with a Muslim jihad. In a interview in July of 2012 with Michael Brown of Spirit Daily here, we read: When everything "explodes," a Muslim jihad will be in the first series of events, he believes, but "that's not the real danger. The real external threat comes from the Red Dragon, China." Now for some specifics, he adds. "From the beginning I had insisted that there would be a rise in wide-scale stark terror as a primary method in this storm. I had written in ’01 that we would see a significant warming in our relations with Russia for a while, followed by them dramatically hitting the rocks again. But I told the priests [who serve as his spiritual directors] to keep their eye on Russia, because in the end she will be our most steadfast and reliable ally. As I have also said since the start, the storm '…will break through North Korea, but will not be centered in North Korea.' "

Concerning North Korea he stated: "The signal event with North Korea has already happened - in May of 2009. I have written several times that I was told the nuclear test then was actually an audition to be nuclear arms merchant and technical consultant to rogue regimes in the Middle East. Just a little under two years ago, our intelligence services confirmed that that is exactly what happened. Now there may be more things ahead from North Korea, but the fundamental matter has already passed."
And again he wrote: "I long ago said – and often repeated – that I had been told the Storm would break through North Korea but would not be centered in North Korea. It already has. Back in May of 2009. Not to worry, I did not recognize it when it happened, either. Rather, while discussing in June of that year with someone else about “when the Storm breaks…” my angel interrupted and told me it already had. He explained that the nuclear test that North Korea did in May of 2009 was more than it seemed…that it was actually N. Korea’s audition to act as nuclear arms merchant and technical consultant to some Middle Eastern rogues, that representatives from several nations, including Iran and Syria had been present – and that agreement had been reached. The Storm had broken. I told my priests but otherwise downplayed it. Last year, American intelligence confirmed that Iran and Syria had been present at that test and that N. Korea had been engaged as technical consultant and supplier to Middle Eastern maniacs. It may be that N. Korea will commit some new showy atrocity to herald the fulness of the Storm, but whether it does or not, the Storm broke in May of 2009.

As with the 2009 nuclear test in North Korea have we also not seen the beginnings of the predicted Muslim jihad with the great ISIS advance in Syria and into Iraq, and their perceived establishment of a Islamic caliphate? Let alone all of the other extremest Muslim jihadist attacks that have been occurring throughout the world?

During this "Great Storm", many, if not all, of our support structures will successively fail, specifying for example technology and the economy, which will be very gravely affected throughout the entire world, and he also foresees the collapse of entire governments. Humanity will lose confidence in most--if not all--of the current global currencies, causing most of the world to return for a time to a barter based system/economy, until a new system of ownership and new currencies are developed and promulgated.

Charlie's mission and message, as I personally perceive it, is to firstly to warn of this upcoming "Great Storm", just as God, in His infinite love and mercy, has always done with the prophets going back to the Old Testament. Charlie says that when the Great Storm comes, people will think it is the end of the world. But he insists that it is not the end, and that it is not God's punishment, but it IS the consequences of what we have done. It is---and these are Charlie's words--"Our reclamation"---it is God, in His infinite love and mercy, calling His people back to Himself.

-The second part or facet of Charlie's mission is to point out how we are to live and act during these perilous times. It is a simple message: "We are to acknowledge God, take the next right step and be a sign of hope to those around us. Trust-Do-Love, knowing that God is always close at hand for us"

When the Blessed Virgin Mary said, “I am the handmaid of the Lord,” She was acknowledging God. When She said, “Let it be done to me according to your word,” she resolved to take the next right step. When She went to visit her cousin, Elizabeth, to help her with her pregnancy, she was being a sign of hope.

And so it is with Charlie's simple message for us: “Acknowledge God; take the next right step; and be a sign of hope to those around you, knowing that God is always close at hand." And this, according to Charlie, is how we are to weather the "Great Storm" that is soon to come upon us.

-According to Charlie, throughout the period (but most especially during the peak) of the Great Storm, the overwhelming vast majority of humanity will "lose hope"--these are Charlie's words, and for sure many will have their faith shaken, like all of the apostles during Jesus passion of whom all (except John) ran away and abandoned Him. Charlie states that we will lose hope in our own ability and/or the ability of humanity to actually recover from the devastating events during this time period. The point is, as much as we think we will be always be faithful and a sign of hope for others no matter what befalls us, it seems that when the horrible time of the Storm and Its unimaginable sufferings comes upon us, those who will be the great heroes of faith-hope-and-trust in God will be very, very few among us, like John vs. the rest of all the other apostles who ran away and abandoned Jesus. So Charlie insists that we not kid ourselves thinking we will be always faithful like John, but warns us, like Jesus did with Peter at the Last Supper with the prophecy of the rooster crowing three times, that we too will abandon Him for a time when the passion and confusion of the Great Storm comes upon us, for "the spirit is willing, but the flesh is very weak."During this purported "Storm", while Charlie foretells of the collapse of governments throughout the world, concerning the United States he specifically foretells of a "Regency period", whereby he states that there will be no US President or elected leader, but an appointed "Regent", and he further suggests that there will actually likely be a series of Regents in succession.The eight public prophecies that have purportedly been given to CharlieIn his article entitled "Go Forth", Charlie reveals eight worldwide events that are said to occur. He states:"I only have eight public prophecies that I insist on. Only the visible, miraculous Rescue by Our Lady, the Immaculate Conception in late 2017, is time sensitive. Five things must happen between now and the Rescue, but can happen at any time during that period. They are:

– The continued toppling of governments throughout the world, including that of the U.S. The toppling of a government does not mean the nation shall fall.

– The confrontation with and fall of political Islam.

– The mass conversion of most Muslims

– The confrontation between the Judeo-Christian world and the current government of China.

– The alliance between Russia and the U.S. to lead the Judeo-Christian world to endure the confrontation with China.

-Then, after the 5 things above comes the miraculous "Rescue" through the Immaculate Heart of Mary sometime in late 2017.Then there are two prophecies that happen shortly after the Rescue. They are the unification of the faithful into one flock under one shepherd and the building and location of the Shrine of thanksgiving for the Rescue on Mount Meeker in Colorado.

Remember that when (or if?) the predicted "Storm" comes upon humanity, that God has a planYet, this loss of hope-most especially in humanities ability to recover from this Storm--is so that we might turn to God and put all of our hope and trust in Him. Until we lose all hope in our own ability to recover and rebuild through our own ingenuity, we will remain in rebellion against God. But when we finally lose that human hope, we will be forced to turn to something greater than ourselves, if we are to have any hope at all, and that is when we will turn a desperate hope towards God, and will find that THAT hope is well-founded. In other words, Charlie points out that we must lose most, if not all, of our current confidence in human supremacy, and then at the end of the Storm when all will seem lost, there will come the miraculous "Rescue" through the Immaculate Heart of Mary, which will be a miraculous visible sign that everyone in the world will see that will be given through the intercession of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, of which I will speak more about below. But concerning this loss of hope, may God help and strengthen all of us. It is comforting to note that God forewarns us of all of these things ahead of time, that we might recall it when the time comes, so that during and afterwards we might take courage knowing not only that God forewarned all of it, but that God has a plan, and that we are to have faith and be a sign of hope for others. In every single one of his conferences, Charlie always emphasizes that "We are to trust in God " and that "God has a plan." This is key to everything.Charlie has stated that while things will get progressively worse during the Storm, there will be "false dawns" wherein people will think that the worst is over, but such will not be the case. The false dawns will only be short pauses in the Storm, somewhat like the eye of a hurricane passing directly overhead, then the Storm "winds" rage on from the opposite and unexpected direction.

More recently, on June 30, 2016, he commented:"When I speak of the Rescue I always call it the Rescue. I have said consistently that God will intervene in the midst of the Storm for all who call on Him and will see. If it were not so, none of us would make it to the Rescue. I want everyone to know God is right at hand right now. There are a whole host of things we must deal with. After the full crash of society, we must get to our feet again to confront both Islam an finally China. This is NOT just one big event. It is a series of events. One battle does not win a war. So press on with the work – and don’t waste too much time savoring the victories when they come, for they will be followed by even starker and greater challenges UNTIL the Rescue. The Rescue is our definitive last chance to get it right."

This writer with Charlie Johnston in July, 2015

Another interesting point that Charlie revealed concerning the Storm is that:"I have been told that 26 million will die as a result of the Storm. I believe that to be a rare instance where the angels are specifically speaking of temporal physical casualties..."
He states that his intention in revealing this number is to show how small the number of actual physical casualties will be for such a large conflagration of horrific worldwide events. This is not to downplay the great significance of 26 million deaths, but to convey that as serious as the events of the Storm will be, the actual physical casualties will only amount to about a third of what they were in World War II, which thus puts the number into an important context. Charlie has also stated: "It is the sustained, unrelenting terror that is the hallmark of this crisis, not the death toll."

I would add that in light of the terrifying prospects of a global economic collapse coupled with a global civil war, the fall of many governments and societies etc., I believe that this particular part of Charlie's prophetic message has actually been a source of consolation to some, given the potentialities involved, especially in this nuclear age.

In a post on his blog on July 11, 2015 called "The Summer of our Discontent" Charlie shared some of his perceptions concerning the beginning of the "fullness of the Storm". According to Charlie, very significant things will start happening from this point on (July 2015) as "...new convulsions shake the world and the Church every week". He ended this article stating:, "We have entered into the summer of our discontent. It will be marked by convulsions, confusion and terror throughout the world and the Church. But after the summer comes fall…and great will be the fall."
A few other quotes from Charlie pertaining to the Storm:-"Many continue to think that the Storm is God’s punishment of us. IT IS NOT. Get that out of your head. The Storm is what we have brought on ourselves. It is an evil that is entirely wrought by our hands. God has nothing to do with it. If you don’t firmly get that right, you will get almost everything else wrong. The great evil is that we have convinced ourselves that we are sufficient to ourselves, that we are masters of our destiny with no need for God, whatsoever."-"Through the means of the Storm, God is giving us another chance to get things right, and this time we had better get it right."-"The Storm is the beginning of our reclamation, not our destruction."-"We will begin to rebuild from the chaos DURING the Storm, as we must to confront certain things. I do not speak much of these times, only that God has specific plans to help us back onto our feet to face the real trials of the Storm. I will play a role in this. After the Storm, the whole culture will be in a rebuilding process as an era of great peace begins."-"God is not punishing us through the means of the Storm. We have brought it upon ourselves. But God has a plan for us and for our reclamation."-"There is no place of safety, except in God, as the darkness surrounds us – and that does not guarantee temporal safety, only spiritual safety. ...and do not think your faith, however abundant, will provide you with a get-out-of-jail free card from the temporal suffering that has begun...The rain from this Storm comes and, as it is written, falls on the just and the unjust alike. ...this will truly be worldwide, there will be no place of safety, and no family will be left untouched by the Storm."-"I have told you before and I emphasize it now: devote yourself during the period of early chaos to caring for those around you. It is obviously good for them, but it will also keep you from obsessing over what is gone. Do that enough days, just doing what the day holds for you, and hope will emerge from the ashes."Charlie predicts that President Obama will not complete his 2nd term and that the next leader will not come from an election
Both on his website and also in at least two videotaped conferences (Birmingham video from 46:00-50:00, and also the Santa Maria Vineyard video at 1:23:30) Charlie has emphatically stated that President Obama will not complete his 2nd term as President, and that the next leader will NOT come from the normal political process. He stated that while it is possible that there could be an election, whoever the person that will be nominated will not be sworn in on January 20, 2017. Specifically, on his website he stated:

August 2, 2015 at 9:30 pm
Donette, I said bluntly on the Birmingham Video that President Obama will not finish his term. I said that he would be eledted [elected] before he received the nomination to my priests, that he would lead us into the fullness of the Storm, that he would leave office in chaos and disgrace before his term was finished, and would live to convert in the end.

"I have often said there will be no presidential election this year. Actually, there are some narrow circumstances in which there could be, but the results would be irrelevant. What I was told was that President Obama would not finish his term and that our next stable national leader will not come from the election process. You could have an explosion of events after an election and before an inauguration. You could have Obama declare a national emergency, cancel elections, extend his term and then depart before the extension was up. The most likely scenario is that everything will be up in the air before election, but there are narrow circumstances where that may not be."

Elsewhere on his blog Charlie elaborated that not only will be no next elected American President, but during the Storm there will actually be a succession of interim national “leaders”, something like what regents would be to a monarchy.

On August 28, 2016 in a post entitled "The election...and other potential triggers", Charlie stated:"....If, next January, Barack Obama peacefully hands over the reins of power to Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump, I will declare myself unreliable and go away. But it will not happen that way, for God has appointed that this be a sign to you to fortify you to trust Him and choose the ordinary way to follow Him through the most frightening year for the globe in history. I appeal to you to quit trying to flatter yourself that you have figured out how God is going to accomplish this, for that way leads to destruction. Trust Him and follow Him whatever happens. I have told you true."
And as a footnote to the prediction concerning Obama, Charlie has stated the following: "I was told Obama would not finish his full term, that he would ultimately repent and convert, but not until long after he had left office and left the world in ashes."

The "Jericho Walk" to Washington D.C.In his September 27, 2016 post entitled "Semper Fidelis, Adeste Fideles", Charlie states: "So today, as we get deeper into these times of fulfillment, I contemplate some stark possibilities. If free and open communication is suspended for more than a day, I will set out on foot toward Washington, D.C. It will not be my sole means of transportation (at least I hope not), but will be how I start. I will not broadcast my route, but I will travel in plain sight, unarmed. If the politico-media complex which currently occupies the governing and cultural institutions of this country seeks to take by force what they cannot win by persuasion, let’s see how they handle a 10-million man march. I do not expect to walk alone."

Why, though, only a 10-million man march in a country of nearly 400 million? Most people will have other, vital things to do to begin restoration of a genuinely civil order. Those who walk will mostly be comprised of unattached men.

The man named Menses
Charlie foresees a man whom the Angels call "Menses." This is not his given name, but just a contemptuous nickname the Angels use to refer to him, for the the Latin word "menses" literally refers to the flow of blood from the uterus during a woman's menstrual cycle. Charlie does not see the man as being specifically the anti-Christ. He will be a man who seems entirely orthodox and will seem to be a great defender of the Catholic faith. He will particularly deceive for a time many who are considered "conservative" Catholics. Charlie has stated "He is given over entirely to the spirit of antichrist and to satan...He is a very bad actor who plays at being a very good actor...He has, with full knowledge, given himself over to the satan. I do not believe he is the personification of the antichrist, but I do not know that he is not. He is a particularly charming, deceptive and malignant minion of satan." He will be revealed for who he truly is only as the Storm ends---right up to the moment of the Rescue.

The Rescue
When all will seem lost, towards the end of the year 2017 will come the miraculous "Rescue". It will come directly through the visible intercession of the Blessed Virgin Mary, coinciding with the 100 year anniversary of Her apparitions at Fatima in 1917 in which She promised that when all seems lost humanly speaking, "In the end, my Immaculate Heart will triumph."*

During the time of the Rescue there will be a miraculous visible sign that everyone in the world will see, and all will recognize it as coming through the heavenly intercession of the Blessed Virgin Mary. It will be the Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary. Concerning the "Rescue" in late 2017, Charlie states that it is the one large scale prophetic message directly from heaven that has not been subject to any interpretive efforts on his part. It has been revealed to him bluntly and plainly, along with orders to let everyone know of it.

After the "Rescue" through the intercession of the Virgin Mary, the now completely renewed humanity will have to rebuild its societies and structures once again, but this time it will be done with a profound humility, trust and love for God and the Blessed Virgin Mary, while seeking always His holy will in all things, just as in the Lord's prayer: "...Thy Kingdom come, Thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven". Immediately after the "Rescue" will come a prolonged - but natural - period of peace, joy and prosperity.

Remarkably the Rescue in late 2017 will also mark the 500 year anniversary of when Martin Luther broke away from the Catholic church--the seminole event which marked the beginning of the Protestant Reformation. Charlie states that the miraculous Rescue will reunite Christianity into one faith, that is, one flock under one Shepherd, Jesus Christ. After the miracle, Christianity will no longer be fragmented into various denominations, and the vast majority of Jews and Muslims will almost immediately be converted to Christianity, along with all other peoples of other religions. Charlie states that one of the things that greatly offends Jesus is that His Mother is not loved or respected by most of those outside the Catholic church, so this is one of the reasons that God wills that the Rescue will come directly through the heavenly intercession of the Blessed Virgin Mary, and thus it will give evidence of the role God has bestowed upon Her as our heavenly advocate, and that it be a concrete sign of Her love and concern for all of humanity.

Charlie Johnston

Concerning this reunification of Christianity, Charlie states that: "The re-unification will not be like a victory celebration where one side wins and all others surrender. Rather, it will be like a joyful family reunion where everyone brings a dish. Our Protestant brethren will regain the structure and foundation they lost at the Reformation, while we Catholics will regain important charisms we have so neglected they have practically been lost to us. No one will feel defeated; all will be overjoyed that the family is back together again."
Recently Charlie explained why he believes that God, through the Angel Gabriel, insisted that Charlie make known the time period of the Rescue, that being in late 2017.He writes: "Just before I embarked on this new pilgrimage, I read a story that fired an idea in my mind as to why I am told to give such a specific time-frame. The story was about shipwrecks near shore in a blinding storm. In such a shipwreck, most who drown do so within easy reach of the shore. Because of the fury of the storm, they can’t see the shore and lose hope, giving up. It ignited a great notion in my mind. I think I am ordered to give that specific time-frame because the Storm will be so furious near its end that many will have lost hope. Since we won’t be able to see the shore of peace, I think it pleases God to direct me to tell you this so that you know in the most furiously tempestuous moments, that the shore is very close, to give you hope to hold on just a little longer. It is a merciful grace, I think."

The great Shrine to be built on Mount Meeker, Colorado
Also after the Rescue there will be a great Shrine-Church built on Mount Meeker in Colorado, which will be one of the many great signs of God's infinite love for us during this upcoming time of renewal for humanity. According to Charlie, the Shrine at Mount Meeker will one day become the "...great Shrine of thanksgiving, and the premier place in the world for people to make a pilgrimage in thanksgiving for the Rescue."

And he adds: "I know little about what happens after the Rescue – but I have been told it will usher in a “prolonged” period of peace, prosperity and authentic brotherhood. I have also been told that in the century after its dedication, the Shrine at Mt. Meeker will be the most visited Shrine in the world. That, along with my angel’s emphasis all my life that this is NOT the end suggests that it will be much longer than a few years."
---------------------------------------------------------
If you do choose to visit Charlie's website, I humbly suggest that you may first want to read the "God's Plan" link at the top of the website, because it gives a good overview of Charlie's alleged mission. I would suggest also that you read the "comments" section beneath each article for many detailed perspectives from Charlie and many others.

As with all mystics and prophets that are not yet approved by the Church, CAUTION and CAREFUL DISCERNMENT are the guiding principles. We should not be too quick to approve, nor quick to condemn, unless in the latter case there is solid evidence and justification to do so. One important thing to consider is the fact that unlike some recent alleged visionaries like "Maria Divine Mercy" and "Locutions to the World", both of which have turned out to be not authentic as I have revealed on this website, Charlie on the other hand uses his own name and identity, and puts his personal reputation on the line and out there for everyone to research and consider in all sincerity.

In the end, the near future will tell whether Charlie's prophecies are from God, or not, and to those who may object to my posting the above information on this website thinking that to do so is imprudent, I respectfully reply with St Paul: "Do not quench the Spirit. Do not despise prophecies, but test everything; hold fast what is good" (1 Thessalonians 5:19-21), and then elsewhere in the Holy Scriptures we read: "Indeed, the Lord GOD does nothing without revealing his plan to his servants the prophets." (Amos 3:7), and so with this in mind I leave everyone free to respectfully post their comments/opinions below.

"My purpose is to reassure people of God's loving intention for them in the trials that are now breaking, to help strengthen them to endure until the time of deliverance." -Charlie Johnston

Charlie Johnson, 2015

--------------------------------------------------------Also for those interested, here is a video of Charlie Johnston in Alabama on July 2015 talking about his experiences:https://vimeo.com/134035153-------------------------------------------------------
*At Fatima on July 13, 1917, the Blessed Virgin Mary stated in part "If My requests are heeded, Russia will be converted, and there will be peace; if not, she will spread her errors throughout the world, causing wars and persecutions of the Church. The good will be martyred, the Holy Father (Pope) will have much to suffer and various nations will be annihilated.....In the end, My Immaculate Heart will triumph. The Holy Father will consecrate Russia to Me. Russia will be converted, and a period of peace will be given the world"------------------------------------------------------Some additional quotes from Charles Johnston:-"I am sent to be a sort of sherpa, a guide through treacherous times, to help encourage and rally people to endure – to trust that rescue will come."

-"At Easter of 2008 at the Vigil, the Lord appeared to me and said, “Now the hour of darkness comes upon the world. But be not afraid. The darkness shall not prevail.” I was given an image of the Garden of Gethsemane, the sense that this was prelude to the world’s passion. I did not assume that meant the world would be plunged into darkness within a few days."

-"People ask how to prepare. I mix some facts with soothing words because people just can’t get their mind around how radically different things are about to be. Faith, family, a defensible shelter and food are the only real assets you can bring to bear. For a short time, it will be primarily a barter economy."

-"The desperation of the war with the Chinese government is what leads up to the Rescue. After the Rescue, remember, comes an extended era of peace, prosperity and true Christian brotherhood."-"God has a plan to carry us to safety and He is ALWAYS close at hand to YOU. God will never leave us bereft.-"Be not afraid. God calls all men to salvation."-"We do not get heaven until we actually get heaven."-"In God's economy nothing is ever wasted, and we are never left bereft.-"If you want to interact with Christ, for it to be fully fruitful, He insists you stretch out your hand in faith."-"Gird your loins, acknowledge God, take the next right step, be a sign of hope to those around you, and be deliberate and steady, knowing that God is always close at hand."___________________________________________________________________________The Prayer Of Miraculous Trust which Charlie states was given to him by heaven:In “The Prayer of Miraculous Trust” post, I specifically relate that Gabriel told me that that prayer would be particularly needed when everything was taken away from people…their jobs, their money, their medicines, their homes…and that it will open up a new age of miracles. The instruction is NOT that you must cease praying for the particular intention after saying this prayer, but that you must not say this prayer more than once for a specific intention. Why? Because there is a great ill in our times that restlessly seeks our own will without taking time to consider God’s will…that we say the words but don’t really believe. This specific prayer is designed to steadily increase actual trust and abandonment to God’s will. Once is enough…and then truly trust.This prayer is to help you turn things over to God, trusting that once you have done so, whatever He then allows is for your eternal good and that of those you love. It lets you ask what you want of God, then closes by abandoning yourself to what God wants of you. Do not say it more than once for any particular intention, as this is an abandonment to trust.Begin by asking for the help of Our Lady of Tepeyac, then cross yourself and say:By the power of Our Lord, Jesus Christ; to the honor of Our Lady, the Immaculate Conception; in service to her Immaculate Heart; I ask you Lord (state intention here and ask for the intercession of the saint of your choice). I thank you for hearing my prayer. Thy will be done. Amen.Cross yourself again, and give it over to God entirely with trust. ____________________________________________________________***Update: March 7, 2016: Archdiocese of Denver Statement on Charlie Johnston***January 7, 2017:Update on Charlie Johnston and the "Presidential Prophecy"

798 comments:

Deeply disappointed. There are plenty of other approved canonised Mystics you could write about and others could learn from but you have chosen one that is neither approved and rather controversial. It concerns me that this "mystic" has an article on his website defending a bishop who was found guilty of not dealing with a pedophile priest appropriately. Much of what is written elsewhere strikes me as very odd. He rants against the validity of theologians and theology, yet this is what the Church uses to guide Christians and is certainly valuable. That is why priests and popes study it! I do not think your argument of putting it on the website for others to decide or discern is responsible as the discerning is really for the Vatican experts. Deeply disappointing, irresponsible post.

To be honest, I have yet to read where Charlie "ranted against the validity of theologians and theology."Questioning the positions of certain theologians is not ranting against theology itself, or the importance of theologians. As far as supporting a bishop that may have been guilty of not dealing with a pedophile priest appropriately, well we all fail at times in our duty to God and our neighbor.

Believe me, I knew very well beforehand that I will be taking some "heat" for publishing this article about Charlie and his *possible* prophetic mission, and the comment above shows this to be true, but I feel that it is very important for me to have published this information about him.

We see in the Old Testament that the people of that time killed nearly every prophet that was sent to them. And then came Jesus, the Son of God, and He received also the same treatment. Should we then expect the people of today to treat possible prophets any different?

May Jesus bless all of your loved ones this Christmas season and throughout the New Year! Glenn Dallaire

I found this blog post very informative and went to Charlie's web site. A very interesting man and I agree that we will find things that we may believe to be misinformation when we arrive in Heaven and finally know the truth.

I've followed Charlie's blog for a couple of months now. What concerns me about him is that even though he has been under spiritual direction for many years, neither his bishop in Illinois or the Archbishop of Denver have ever commented on him or his experiences.

I found this, credit to its writer, Kevin Orlin Johnson: Just about the last thing any bishop looks forward to is that late-night call about yet another hometown visionary. His efforts will be directed at keeping things orderly until an investigation can be made—if in fact the report warrants investigation. Usually, the thing is so far outside the spectrum of genuine mystic activity that he’ll respond only with silence, and silence from the local bishop is really a public proclamation that the thing deserves no notice. Even if it does turn out to be real, the most that any post-biblical apparition gets is a negative approval—an official declaration that there’s nothing in the report or in its implications that’s contrary to the faith, so that it’s "worthy of belief." That means that you can believe it or, if you aren’t interested, not.

It's now 2015, and if the Archbishop of Denver found any reason to publicize these messages - because the claimed rescue is only two and a half plus years away - he likely would have. Why not, then? Something isn't adding up.

Acknowledge God, take the next right step, and be hope to those around you...

All i can say his message might not have approval such as our own private revelations... If his messages bring hope and leads people to praise God and to engage in his will and not ours... This is the truth. I respect Charlie will Not sugar coat what is coming and to keep us from vanity is leading us to be more humble. There is nothing wrong to give opinion . I read this website and Charlie's as it brings hope and peace to many. God bless you all!!🙏🙏🙏

Wow! Really good point Daniel!!! Glen, I have been reading Charlie's website for a few months and also occasionally have read things from your website. Thank you so much for this post! I think it was very well done!! You are definitely following St. Paul's advice!!! God bless you and thank you so much for your faithfulness to Our Lord and His Church!!

Glenn, you have a responsibility to what you promote on your site.Why do you promote this man? He is not approved. Anyway he shows flaws. Just like Garabandal and yet you choose to still allow this to be promoted.

I believe it is a terrible wrong to promote falseness.It is a good idea to just stick with what the church officially recommends.

I think posting about Charlie is fine. But he is not a typical mystic and things from his life, like living in sin/dating/sex occured over the a span of some of his apparitions. What is not also typical is that he sees apparitons: Jesus, Mary, Angels and the Saints talk to him. This is not typical!

Typical is getting messages, words and visions through God, not personal visits. Also, for a considerable bit of time during these apparitions Charlie was a roaming Protestant, but looking for truth before he became a Roman Catholic some 20 years ago.Charlie is 110% orthodox Catholic.

People need to be made aware of these things in YOUR writing Glenn else they are not sufficiently equipped to apply their discernment.

Anon57I made a correction to some bad wording in the previous post, please delete the earlier one.

I too have been reading Charlie's blog for just over a year now and find his work and writings to be authentic and will continue as long as the messages continue to strengthen the life of the Faith. As a strong Catholic I find the information and advice to be helpful in my faith journey and have been inspired to much more humility, trust, and prayer in my life. As far as the assertions of private revelation, we will know very soon if they are valid but nonetheless he stresses little significance to details of them and more importantly the authentic revealing of true living of the Faith and checking our vanity and pride before an all powerful and triune God's plan to "trust and do love".

I have just put your site on my favorites, because I can see that there are a lot of articles I want to read. I am here via the link on Charlie's web from his latest blog.

I know that a lot of people feel very uncertain when a person does not have "approval" from their local bishop or someone higher. However, I have been reading the blog for almost a year, and, like many others, have found the information insightful and "faith building".

He has given information to his three priest spiritual directors over a period of 12 years. This included events during that time that verified what he said. It was only after that period of time that he began his blog, The Next Right Step.

If someone does not feel comfortable with the information they read there, it is easy to quit going to his site.

I would like to thank everyone who has commented thus far. Your comments are all very insightful and sincere, and I really appreciate them.

Concerning publishing information on this website about mystics/prophets/visionaries that have not yet been judged or approved by the Church, my understanding of Church teaching on this matter is that the faithful are free to discern for themselves, until if/when the rightful Church authority makes a judgement.

Now, in regards to Charlie Johnston, for over a decade he has been submitting his private revelations to several priest-directors, who as priests are the first representatives of the Church, and whom, I would assume, in their turn inform the local Ordinary (Bishop). This is common and ordinary practice and the way that private revelations are judged by the Church. And through his priest-directors, Charlie has been given permission to write his blog.

Since thus far the local Bishop has not passed judgement on Charlie's private revelations, the faithful are free to discern for themselves the possible authenticity of Charlie's prophetic messages/writings.

Now, as for myself, this writer has yet to find anything in Charlie's writings against Church doctrine, faith and morals. And as one other commentator stated, the near future will tell as to the authenticity of Charlie's prophecies, because one in particular--which allegedly came directly from his Angel--has a specific date-frame, that being the end of 2017, and even earlier there should be significant world-wide events that are said to lead up to this time (of late 2017). So, time will indeed tell....

From now until then, given the grave importance of Charlie's message, I believe he should get a fair "hearing" by everyone.

Glen, thank you for sharing about Charlie Johnston.I have been reading in his blog for nearly 2 Months now and find his writings informative, encouraging and to be honest full of a sense of humour which lifts me heart sometimes.I like his style, and have no fears to date that he will lead me astray. LOL God bless and happy New Year to all here.

While prayerfully reflecting on the possibility of the "Great Storm" that may be coming upon the world, an image of the Gospel suddenly rushed into my thoughts---it was the scene of the apostles in the boat during a great storm wherein the waves were buffeting the boat, and suddenly Jesus appeared, standing upon the stormy waters, and calling Peter to walk upon the water to Him.

The part in this reflection that really made a huge impression on me was how Peter suddenly began sinking the moment he took His eyes off of Jesus. I realized in a flash that this will be the key to weathering the Storm when/if the time comes--keeping our hearts and minds continually upon Jesus--and incidentally today, January 3, is the Memorial of the Holy Name of Jesus.

I've gotten quite a lot out of this site in the past several months. It has been at key moments deeply inspiring, and played a part in some significant spiritual renewal. However, I have to agree with the other commentators who are questioning your wisdom in including the Charlie Johnston article among your other material here.

If I had seen that article, or anything like it, when I first stumbled upon this site some months ago, I would have moved on immediately. I never would have lingered to discover Claude Newman's story or some of the other inspiring articles, which are quite difficult to find anywhere else in such an accessible form. I think there must be other people like me, who may need some inspiration and who could benefit greatly from your collection, but will just stop looking through it as soon as they see the Charlie Johnston article--and never come back.

Prolific visionaries talking about End Times scenarios are fairly common, almost a kind of genre, and of a completely different character from the other giants of faith at this site. Mr. Johnston has not earned a place alongside them.

I think it is imprudent to include the article and I hope you reconsider and take it down. You express so much uncertainty yourself, in your own words, that this should be enough in itself to convince you to change course.

At any rate, though I think I have to move on from your site now, I do thank you for the help many of the other articles have been to me, about four articles in particular.

I understand well your caution and your prudence--in fact, I encourage it when it comes to unapproved private revelations. And remember also, we do not need to believe any private revelations--even the ones the Church has approved and deemed worthy of belief. This is why St Paul says "Test everything and hold fast only to what is good".

I can only say that I personally find Charlie's writings and prophetic message hope-filled, inspiring and also potentially very important. But this is only my take on the matter. Everyone is free to discern and decide for themselves.

Once again I thank you for your comments and may God bless you and your loved ones.-Glenn Dallaire

TO ALL:While reflecting another consideration came to mind: If on this website I was to post articles and information ONLY on Church approved mystics and visionaries, this site would be just another Saint website, and there are already plenty of these on the internet. Why repeat what is already readily available?

So long as the mystics and visionaries have NOT received a negative judgement by the Church, would not you, my dear readers, want to know about them?

Those who study the lives of the mystics realize right away THAT DURING THEIR LIFETIMES MOST EVERY MYSTIC AND VISIONARY IS INITIALLY CONSIDERED CONTROVERSIAL BY MOST.

Let's just use my two favorite mystics for an example---St Padre Pio and St Gemma Galgani--BOTH canonized Saints of the Church:St Padre Pio was so controversial during his life that at one time he received strong sanctions/restrictions by BOTH his local Bishop (Bishop Gagliardi) and also by the Vatican Holy Office (today the Holy Office is now called the Congregation for Doctrine and Faith).

And St Gemma was considered a "religious hysteric" and "deluded" by most of the priests who knew her and also by many of the people in her hometown of Lucca. One physician stated in an official report that Gemma herself created her stigmata "by the use of pins", and even her own confessor since childhood, Monsignor Volpi, constantly doubted for years her visions and the mystical gifts that she received.

And so controversy, suspicion and disbelief are always part and parcel in the lives of ALL mystics/visionaries/prophets.

And so it is that this article above was posted with the heading "We report, you decide".

You know I've spend the last couple of months looking for new articles on your site. By looking at the right, by looking for a sidebar. I almost quit looking until you posted that I should look for "Latest Articles" further down.

Still that area for it, is rather weirdly, well congested. Not user friendly.

Hi Glenn,I have been reading your blog for quite some time though I haven't commented until now. Unlike a number of the those who commented above I was very pleased to see this article on Charlie Johnston and I'd like to share my reasons why.

Beyond the alleged prophecies and his claims of heavenly visitors there is a remarkable wisdom about the man that you rarely see today. This wisdom is so clear and profound in its very simplicity that I can't see how it could come from anyone but God. Satan just doesn't have this kind of simplicity and wisdom. Evil has a sly genius not the firm constant stream of wisdom you find on Charlie's site. I really was surprised at what I found there. When I first started reading it I approached his blog on a note of caution - there are so many false visionaries out there. However, I was genuinely surprised at what I found there. Before people make rash judgments on whether Charlie Johnson is a false visionary or not I would like to point out a few things that they may not have considered. As someone who struggled with a neuromuscular condition for many years I know that Charlie's pilgrimage across the country had to be extremely difficult. Yet he did it. Why? Because God asked him too. This takes an incredible amount of trust when one is already suffering.

The beautiful thing about God is that he doesn't always choose the best. On the contrary, he often chooses the worst or those the world would pass over without a second glance. To me, the fact that Charlie has an imperfect past is not a strike against him. Rather, it seems to me that it fits in very well with the theme of Charlie's mission. What better sign of hope for a generation of sinners than to see God's work first hand in one? That he wasn't a "born saint" greatly encourages me and gives me hope. It proves the point that God is in the business of transforming sinners. To me, it's a breath of fresh air that Charlie is really human and not an angel. (Then again, I'm not greatly fond of perfection in general. Our understanding of perfection and God's are very different.)

"Trust-do-love", "acknowledge God, take the right next step and be a sign of hope to those around you" - this is what Charlie is teaching people.

Not to mention St. Faustina, whose "Divine Mercy Diary" and the conveyed messages were not only not approved but they were even condemned by the Catholic Church for quite a long time. The "Divine Mercy Diary" was enlisted on the "banned" books by the Church authorities. After decades, in a great part thanks to a determined involvement of cardinal Karol Wojtyla aka later St.John Paul II, Faustina was approved by the Church and is now considered to be one of the greatest mystics/saints ever...As for Charlie, he is a very honest and self-distanced man who does not claim to be a prophet; he repeats what he was told ( only what he is allowed to share ) and he himself jokingly stated that we readers should be reasonable just in case he is another random nut. So time will tell, but his website ( https://charliej373.wordpress.com ) and the whole community is worth taking a look at.

Regarding the comment by anonymous: "He shows flaws" . Can you elaborate anonymous? I have yet to meet an authentic human who does not show flaws. It would do us good to remember that this article wasn't titled "The cause for Charlie Johnston's sainthood" but was a post about "An alleged prophet with a critically important message for humanity".

A couple of brief thoughts on what I find to be an extremely troubling series of messages:

-While pretty much everything we know about Johnston comes from Johnston himself (and is thus difficult to verify) the one thing that comes up in his descriptions of his conduct, again and again, is obedience, both to his spiritual directors and to authority in general. It is the single most persuasive argument in his favor (assuming, again, that he is indeed telling the truth, seeing as to the best of my knowledge we have only his own word for this).

-As for the prudence of putting up this article: One of the things that Johnston has claimed about the coming Storm is that our technology will fail us. He explicitly stated that telecommunications will go down (and, judging by a number of his comments, I'm inclined to believe that the electric power grid itself will also be taken out in many areas). So, assuming that the Storm indeed comes to pass, in the very near future this website will not be up and/or available any more. If the message is to be disseminated, it has to be done now, while the means to do so are still granted to us.

I think these two comments from Charlie also give evidence to the possible authenticity of his private revelations:

"....There are those who esteem private revelation more than they esteem Scripture and the Magisterium. They seek to beguile people away from the faith. I have had much private revelation, but if the Church told me through its proper teaching authority I had been deceived, I would immediately hold fast to what the Church teaches – for that is what Christ told me to do, both in Scripture – which is binding – and in private revelation – which is not."------------"My job is to assure people that God is close to them, to assure them that Christ’s promises and assurances are not in vain, and above all to help all keep to a safe path, running off neither in panic nor curiosity into dangerous places....The proper standard is how well you are filled with hope in God, with confidence that He is with you, in the security of life in the Church, to stick to the faith as it has been handed on to you, with resolve to do the little you can to help those around you. If that is sparked, than I am accomplishing my purpose. If not, I am failing. I would so much rather you dismiss all my visitations as the product of an overheated imagination if you would adopt my exhortation to acknowledge God, take the next right step and be a sign of hope to those around you than to parse the details of the former while neglecting the latter."

I would like to thank everyone who has commented thus far--both those in favor, and those against the information about Charlie Johnston that is provided here.

And for the sake of any new visitors here, I would like to point out that as the creator of this website, I endeavor always to remain in union with the Catholic church and Its teachings.

Having personally met and known three different alleged mystics during my lifetime, TWO OF WHICH HAVE SINCE RECEIVED NEGATIVE JUDGMENTS FROM THE CHURCH, I definitely do not take these matters lightly.

In fact, when I do find (or am told about) a mystic/visionary, I am always very careful to first find out if there has been any directives from the local Bishop concerning the individual. And afterwards if I do happen to come across anything in the person's life or writings that are NOT in conformity with Church doctrine or teachings, I do not hesitate to contact the persons local Bishop with the information.

At the same time of writing this article I also wrote a letter to her bishop in Dublin, Ireland, requesting an Official Statement from the Bishop concerning her, and along with the (presumed?) help of others who likely contacted him, the Bishop published a Official statement against her alleged messages a few months later.

And this is not the only time I have written to a local Bishop about a alleged mystic/visionary. So, my point is that I think the facts show that this writer is not lacking in careful and cautious discernment when it comes to private revelation.

Most of what Mr. Johnson says jibes with other predictions made in approved apparitions. It is indeed possible that he is only repeating what others have said, but it is equally possible that he is the "real deal." So far, there's nothing on his website that is contrary to faith and/or morals (differences of opinion don't count). Of course, the fact that he has a website as all could weigh against him, since most genuine visionaries shun publicity of any kind. So there are arguments to be made on both sides of the issue. That's why it's te Church who has the final say on such things. In the meantime, there is nothing wrong with reading what he has to say, until and unless he comes out with something clearly contrary to faith/morals.

I thank you for your always gracious and charitable responses, Mr. Dallaire. However, my opinion is unchanged, and if anything stronger.

My hokum detector was already trembling before seeing Mr. Johnston's site, but having visited it and had more of a look around, the needle is off the charts. The man is very full of himself. The best I can say is that he may be sincere in believing that his visions are real (and that is not necessarily a good thing).

I am sorry Mr. Dallaire, but I really cannot recommend your own site to anyone now, because you are including Mr. Johnston here as a "mystic." You are doing yourself and your readers a great disservice. Surely there must be more criteria to bring to bear in such cases than simply the fact that a given individual does not say anything that contradicts dogma, and has not actually been disapproved, so far. The "obedience" issue does not in itself mean much. What have his priest and bishops asked him to do that he had to be obedient about? How has his obedience been tested? He simply asserts that he would be obedient in principle. If it came down to it, maybe he would, maybe he wouldn't. We have no way of knowing. And that would be only one of the many hurdles to giving credence to Mr. Johnston.

You may not agree with me, but at least heed the words of the Archangels and the Blessed Mother, who brief me daily on such matters. (Not. That was just a joke, and it wasn't to be mean, but to make a point.)

Hi Anonymous, You said "My hokum detector was already trembling before seeing Mr. Johnston's site, but having visited it and had more of a look around, the needle is off the charts."

I personally have not been blessed with a "hokum detector" so I can't comment about that, but I have been blessed with a "pooey sensor", at thus far it has not gone off while reading Charlie's writings, for whatever that is worth.

But all jesting aside, I really do appreciate your sincere comments. And to be clear, I definitely am not stating that Charlie is an authentic mystic, but only that he is a POSSIBLE mystic/prophet living amongst us.

Glenn, I am deeply disappointed by your post regarding Charlie Johnston. Your bio of him is woefully incomplete. See this set of articles for a more comprehensive biography. http://www.spiritdaily.net/johnston.htm He is anything but humble and is extremely grandiose. The poor folks at Mother of God forum are so beholden to his locutions for what???? failed prophecies and poor financial advice.

Previous comment above: "He is anything but humble and is extremely grandiose."----Now, from the post Charlie just published on his website this evening:"You don't need to believe anything about my visitations to see the signs of the times. Dismiss it all...but please, acknowledge God, take the next right step and be a sign of hope to those around you. If you will just do this, whatever happens, you will help rescue the world.

I have refrained from writing of late largely because I am trying to figure out how to convey the urgency that is already upon us. I'm stupid in many ways."-----Sorry, but this definitely does not sound like a man who is prideful/lacking in humility.

Once again, if the Archbishop of Denver found these messages "urgent" and "necessary", he would have started investigating them a long time ago. He, in Charlie's own words, never responded to Charlie's requests to see him.

Sorry, your are very right. What I wrote in the above article is indeed "woefully incomplete". But honestly, this article is not meant to be a biography by any means--it is simply meant to be a "We report, you discern" type of article. It is a "This man Charlie claims to have received heavenly visitations all of his life and is now saying something VERY important regarding the current fate of humanity in these times" type of article.

Personally, I am not publicly endorsing Charlie and his proposed heavenly inspired messages--but I definitely am not denouncing him either. As far as this website goes, I am neutral. I have been reading his writings, and I have my own opinion about them, but I endeavor to keep my opinion to myself. But I do ask and encourage YOU, my dear readers, to post your thoughts and opinions here, so that things may be discerned from as many different perspectives as possible.

As to what seems to be indifference on the part of the local Bishop, this "wait and see" approach is actually the normal position of the Church when it comes to mystics/visionaries/prophets.

Unless there is a huge local groundswell of interest amongst the faithful in the person/events, the local Bishop doesn't normally officially investigate such matters, and thus far in Charlie's case there does not seem to be a whole lot of "fanfare" within the local diocese or abroad to necessitate any official investigation.

So long as the alleged mystic is not saying or doing anything against Church doctrine, most Bishops will take this "hands off wait and see" approach, although some do choose to be kept informed, and this is usually done by a priest who is close to the individual.

Yes, but in the cases of Medjugorje and Kibeho there were not only multiple visionaries involved, but not long after the onset there was a great deal of interest by the faithful in both cases, particularly being highlighted in local radio and TV news reports etc...

Thus far, Charlie has not received such a high degree of interest and attention from the faithful. But who knows--that can easily change....

In October 1995 the Congregation For The Doctrine of the Faith clarified the Church's position on the dissemination of the writings based on private revelations. 1. The interpretation by some people of a decision approved by Paul VI on October 14, 1966, and promulgated on November 15 of the same year, by virtue of which writings and messages coming from presumed revelations might be freely spread within the Church is absolutely not valid. This decision actually referred to the 'Abolition of the Index of Banned Books,' and said that - once relative censures were lifted - the moral obligation in any case not to spread or read those writings which endangered faith and morals still remained.

2. A reminder, therefore, that for the diffusion of texts of presumed private revelations, the norm of the Code in force, Canon 823, para 1, which gives pastors the right 'to demand that the writings of the faithful which touch faith or morals be submitted to their own judgment before publication', remains valid.

3. Presumed supernatural revelations and writings which regard them are in the first instance subject to the judgment of the diocesan bishop and, in particular cases, to that of the episcopal conference and the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith.[79]

It is a misconception that the faithful do not need permission to publish alleged private revelations since the abolition of Canon 1399 and 2318 of the former Canonical Code by Pope Paul VI in AAS 58 (1966) on October 14, 1966. The truth is that Pope Paul VI only abolished the Index Librorum Prohibitorum,[80] and that Canon 823 and 824 of the current 1983 Code of Canon Law define the right and duty of the bishop to censor all material concerning faith or morals.[81]

The canonization of a mystic or an imprimatur given to a book of revelations do not mean a private revelation is authentic, because the church does not pronounce on alleged revelations when it pronounces on the holiness of an individual[82] and because the Imprimatur only guarantees that a book is free from all doctrinal and moral errors.[81]It may well be that by disseminating these writings Canon law has been broken. In the interests of the people of God it may well be best to take this post down.

You also have to remember that with Kibeho and Medjugorje, there were (still are with the case of Medjugorje) huge amounts of people making pilgrimages to those areas to witness the apparitions. I think that also had a great deal to do with the local bishops taking immediate action. Charlie's case is very different and really cannot compare to Kibeho or Medjugorje. He is not having apparitions where streams of people are going to visit him to witness these alleged apparitions/visitations. His work is being done behind a computer, through a blog. He is not saying or doing anything against Church doctrine. I appreciate the work that he is doing and I find his advice to be very helpful. If anything his work has helped to remind me that I need to keep my eyes on the Lord and to trust in HIM no matter how bad things get.

Private revelations require patience and discernment before a complete assessment of them can occur. For example, after the Blessed Virgin's appearance at Lourdes, there were over 150 alleged Marian apparitions in the next five years in Europe alone! None of these were ever authorized after subsequent investigation and discernment.

In regards to the post from Anonymous concerning Canon law, when one does a Google search for "Canon law concerning publication of private revelations", a whole slew of links and information is available from various sources, but the prevailing consensus is that current canon law permits the publication of alleged private revelations without the need for Ecclesiastical permission, so long as what is published does not contradict Catholic doctrine.

In the case of the article above, I would like to point out that there is actually no alleged private revelations/messages anywhere in the article, but only MY OWN PERSONAL INTERPRETATIONS of what Charlie Johnston has prophetically stated.

And as far as Charlie goes, he has stated that he has the permission of his spiritual directors to publish his alleged prophetic revelations on his blog, and that his blog is monitored by at least one of his spiritual directors.

Does Charlie have something in writing with a letterhead from his spiritual director to post saying that its okay to publish his locutions? Glenn I hope you don't take offense but you mentioned that you had 'followed' two alleged mystics that turned out to be false. Would you tell us the names of who those are to help in our own discernment? I went to the prayer meetings of Teresa Lopez in Denver for about a year (1992-1993) and was disappointed when Archbishop Stafford asked us to stop, but I did and don't regret his pastoral guidance. Also Glenn, did you ever publish the name of the mystic who was very sick and emaciated and said that the warning would be soon? Thanks

Hi Anonymous,To reply your questions:1) You would have to ask Charlie about the permission he received from his spiritual director to publish on his blog. You can find his email address in the "contact" section of his blog.

2) I choose not to state the names of the three individual mystics that I have personally known/met and of whom I followed for a time, but I can say that I personally have been immediately and completely obedient to the decisions of the Church concerning two of them, although one of them I had not really followed all that closely. The third has never been investigated by the local Bishop. I can say that I learned many very valuable lessons from each of these persons, but a few were also very painful lessons, but Jesus draws even more good for us out of the painful lessons.

3) No, I have not published the name or the story "of the mystic who was very sick and emaciated and said that the warning would be soon?" because beyond all expectations she is still living, yet she is still very ill and emaciated, and is therefore suffering a great deal. A prayer for her intentions would be very much appreciated. Those interested can read the article about her here: Are the End Times Coming Upon Us

Glenn, don't get sucked in by any alleged mystic. There's nothing new under the sun. I found his "revelations" boring. We've heard all this stuff before.

I would think Our Lord and His Blessed Mother would be more concerned with the wretched state of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church than China and Russia. We will all die one day of one thing or another, sooner or later. But our souls will live on.

All these alleged mystics say the same stuff. And all of their apologists defend them with the same words and in the same manner.

Maybe I've lived too long and seen too much and been through much too many times.

We don't need more division. Or more confusion in the Church. And this is what someone like this man does. Another group breaks off in a little sect "living" and promoting his messages. And more Catholics become confused.

"Nothing new under the sun" and "boring"---Really? I have to disagree with you on most everything that you said, because my own life experiences along with the dozens of mystics on this website prove and show very clearly how different and unique each mystic is. While they may sometimes share similar mystical gifts and charisms, the heavenly graces that they receive are always unique and different, and God leads each of them along very different paths and spiritual journeys, each according to His own purpose and His will for them.

And I think most everyone will agree that while many of the purported heavenly messages from visionaries over the past century might share some similarities, overall they are different in substance.

And when it comes to purported heavenly messages, I mean, do you really find the messages of Akita to be the same as the messages Medjugorge, for example?

I simply don't see how you can find Charlie's alleged prophetic messages to be "boring" and "we have heard all of this stuff before" and "all of these alleged messages "say the same stuff". I can see how one might not believe them to be authentic, but "boring" and "the same stuff"? Who else have you read that speaks of a "Great Storm" effecting all of humanity to the core, occurring from now to the end of 2017, with a miraculous "Rescue" from the Blessed Virgin Mary in late 2017? I would really like to know what other visionary that you know of that has said the same thing?

The Bishop Emeritus of Corpus Christi Texas wrote about Charlie yesterday on his blog and posted Charlie's latest post, if that means anything to anyone.http://abyssum.org/2015/01/07/god-chose-you-to-live-in-these-turbulent-times-stand-your-post-and-be-valient/

It shows how Our Lady of Kibeho predicted not only the Rwandan genocide 12 years before it occurred, but also how She gave a Warning for all of humanity, and that the bloody genocide was likely a sign of what likely is to come.

Quote from the Congregation of the doctrine of the Faith:1. The Interpretation given by some individuals to a Decision approved by Paul VI on 14 October 1966 and promulgated on 15 November of that year, in virtue of which writings and messages resulting from alleged revelations could be freely circulated in the Church, is absolutely groundless. This decision actually referred to the "abolition of the Index of Forbidden Books" and determined that --- after the relevant censures were lifted --- the moral obligation still remained of not circulating or reading those writings which endanger faith and morals.

2. In should be recalled however that with regard to the circulation of texts of alleged private revelations, canon 623 #1 of the current Code remains in force: "the Pastors of the Church have the Š right to demand that writings to be published by the Christian faithful which touch upon faith or morals be submitted to their judgement".

3. Alleged supernatural revelations and writings concerning them are submitted in first instance to the judgement of the diocesan Bishop, and , in particular cases, to the judgement of the Episcopal Conference and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Charlie's Bishop has not approved his writings. You may not be quoting him but you have provided links to his writings via his website. This is contrary to Canon law. Respect the Church's position and the wellbeing of God's people. Take the post down.

Hi Daniel,Thanks for your comments. I appreciate and understand very well your position, just like I appreciate and understand the position of "anonymous" concerning respect for canon law, and I very much agree with you that it is widely accepted that the current canon law allows for publication of alleged private revelations, so long as they do not contradict Church doctrine.

Over the years that I have had my 5 Christian based websites, I have NEVER banned a single person from commenting. All I have ever asked is that commentators be respectful and charitable towards others. And of course, I don't expect people to agree with my thoughts and perspectives, and in fact I have learned very well that one can often learn many things from others, and with this in mind I encourage people to post their thoughts and reflections.

What matters most is that I personally remain in conformity with Church doctrine and teaching, and to keep this website within these guidelines. And, in the case of this article, like you I am certain that such matters can be published without infringing upon Church law in any way.

Thank you for your site and for having the courage to introduce Charlie Johnston.

I too was skeptical at first, but I have now become quite fond of him and his writings. I look forward to visiting his site every day now. I, most often than not, leave his site with peace and mainly hope.

My wayward son even visits his site regularly, that in itself is a miracle.

First, thanks for your comments.As far as the link on Charlie's blog linking to "Spirit Daily" website, I personally have to disagree with your assessment of that website. It serves as a great resource for spiritual news and information that is not normally covered on the "mainstream" websites. Sure, some of the topics and stories covered there can be controversial, but then Jesus Himself was controversial to the mainstream Jews of His time. And, many of the Saints and mystics of the Church were controversial to their fellow Catholics and countrymen. Just because such "off the beaten path" topics may not interest you personally, this does not mean that they don't fall under the acceptable beliefs in the Catholic church.

Now as to the other anonymous comment concerning how St Padre Pio never said anything about the alleged '3 days of darkness', I agree with you completely. This has been refuted by the Capuchin's at San Giovanni Rotundo.

But anyway, I am wondering why do you mention this fact? To my knowledge Charlie Johnston has never said anything about this, so I am wondering why you are bringing it up?

The same goes for your comment about not seeking 'secrets'. Prophecy is not 'secrets'---it is information (often, but not always a forewarning) from God to be of benefit to His children, to foretell of upcoming events, and often to help them navigate through a difficult period. The Old Testament is full of prophets and prophecies given to benefit the people of God. It is not at all a matter of seeking 'secrets'.

Glenn, thank you for posting Charlie's work. I am skeptical of the vast majority of apparations, seers, locutionists, etc. Fatima was enough for me, but I've read Charlie now for 6 months and never found one thing from him to be inauthentic or cause me to be fearful or confused.

I think the attacks on you for posting Charlie's story and "promoting" him from the anonymous commenters are very telling. Why are they so vehement in shutting him up? Why not just ignore him, the Truth also comes out. Makes you wonder, no?

My thoughts on discernment: True wisdom and understanding is a gift from God, and Its source is God, and it comes through the Holy Spirit. The Book of Wisdom in the Old Testament(among others, like the book of Sirach for example) shows the great importance and the immense value of this gift of Wisdom, and how precious the Old Testament writers considered It.

From our human perspective, the basis of discernment is the Holy Scriptures and the doctrines of the Church. But human effort and intelligence can only take a person so far when it comes to discernment--not to lessen in any way the importance of Holy Scripture and the doctrines of the Church--but like faith, true wisdom and understanding is a gift from God, not human effort. So, the comparison to gaining knowledge and discernment over the years by studying the stock market is really not a good one, since it is based solely on human effort.

If we sincerely seek to discern the truth, God does not leave us alone to discern for ourselves using our knowledge of scripture and doctrine, but He helps greatly i n this discernment by enlightening and guiding us through the Holy Spirit.

"If we sincerely seek to discern the truth, God does not leave us alone to discern for ourselves using our knowledge of scripture and doctrine, but He helps greatly in this discernment by enlightening and guiding us through the Holy Spirit."

Yeah that works marvelously for Protestants and Sola Scriptura too!

Protestants have Jesus and the Holy Spirit also.

Frankly, speaking the saints have been led astray at times, and I know gifted people who have been seriously led astray. One lady, very gifted, was sending money to Fr. Gruner,and even flying to go visit him by spiritual prompting that were from the devil and keeping these things secret from her husband. She eventually wised up. Some things take years and serious effort towards knowledge.

I enjoy SpiritDaily but its not for people of all levels, especially baby Catholics with no discernment. If what you say about discernment was true, then Michael Browns discernment would be at a higher level and he would not have published the many wrong things that I've witnessed for the past 15 years.

RCB: Actually, Protestants DO NOT have the gift of the Holy Spirit to the extent that most Catholics do. The gifts of the Holy Spirit are especially bestowed upon an individual during the Sacrament of Confirmation, of which Protestants do not receive.

Anonymous: Not sure if your comment about the "gift of truth" was in reference to one of my earlier comments?, but personally I never said there was such a thing as "the gift of truth". I personally have only spoken of discerning the truth.

How about prayer and fasting for discerning the spirits? Here is a small blurb from a Spirit Daily article on Charlie Johnston

"I can't tell you the authenticity of it, what he's seeing or whatever, but I can attest to his character," his spiritual director, who wishes to remain unnamed, told Spirit Daily. "What he's claiming is pretty incredible. I guess the thing I can summarize is that he's a stable individual, he has a stable personality, and he's a man of deep prayer. Has he predicted things? Yes and no. He's been right on some things and wrong on others. He's a man of prayer and well-grounded. Is there undisputable evidence? No."

That sounds pretty iffy to me. Also a big red flag for mystics is for them to state something definitive with an attached date and then it does not transpire ie. Christmas 2013 was the last normal Christmas.

Actually Glenn there are numerous Protestant churches which avail themselves of the glory of the sacrament of Confirmation including the Anglican, Presbyterian, Methodist, Lutheran and even the Latter Day Saints churches. I have found people confirmed in these churches to exhibit numerous gifts of the Holy Sprirt. This has included being charitable to Catholics who may not have been charitable towards them and said such things as they are not as gifted with "as much" of God's graces and gifts as Catholics are.

You wrote:'I think the attacks on you for posting Charlie's story and "promoting" him from the anonymous commenters are very telling. Why are they so vehement in shutting him up? Why not just ignore him, the Truth also comes out. Makes you wonder, no?'

I can't speak for the other anonymous commenters but you've certainly got me wrong, so perhaps got them wrong too. I don't mean wrong in your insinuation that we are under control of a fiendish, perhaps demonic will that wants to silence Charlie Johnston (no, I'll let that one go). I mean wrong about our plain and explicit motives.

Glenn calls Johnston a "possible" prophet (the emphasis is Glenn's) and explicitly encourages dissenting views. How is taking Glenn up on that "attacking" Glenn? I like Glenn. He is clearly a good man and I appreciate his work here--have personally benefited from it. I'm trying to help Glenn out. Unfortunately, he still doesn't get it in this case, but I hope he comes around eventually.

Neither am I "vehement about shutting him [Johnston] up". Johnston is perfectly free to publish his preposterous folksy twaddle at his own site and I wouldn't think of trying to stop him, I just don't want to have to look at his name here, sandwiched between the Kibeho vision and Maria Teresa Carloni. He's out of place.

"Why not just ignore him" Well, yes, I'd love to ignore him, but that's hard to do when I have to pass by his name whenever I want to get to the article about Claude Newman or Mary Crushing the Serpent. We are asking Glenn to help us ignore him. Please help us ignore Charlie Johnston.

As for additional motives, they are a bit hard to itemize, but off the cuff I'd say that the appearance of Johnston here has the effect of dimming the radiance and tarnishing the holiness of the actual mystics written about on this site, and tends to undercuts the benefit and inspiration I thought I was getting here. In addition, Johnston's material represents a certain tawdry, sensational, lurid, tired, cliche, hackneyed kind of end-times-ism that is, yes indeed, best ignored.

To me, it simply comes down to a matter of to report, or not to report. I think the majority of those who visit this website have a great interest in mystics (or else they would not be visiting here, right?) So, if an alleged prophet might possibly be in our midst, who is guided and monitored by several priest spiritual directors, comes speaking of important matters that concern the whole of humanity for the very near future, and coming forth sincerely, in his own full name, while stating nothing against Catholic doctrine--wouldn't you think that most people would like to know about it, to discern and decide for themselves if the person and his alleged prophetic message may have truth and meaning for them?

And so it is that I filed this report under the title "We report, you discern." As to whether Charlie Johnston merits to be alongside the other mystics on this website----well, given his prophetic message and the date attached to it, the near future will tell for sure.

We don't need Charlie to tell us what to do, Jesus has already told us:Jesus replied: “'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.” Matt 22:36-40. It is all there in the Bible. Moreover I find talk about "Warnings" at odds with what Jesus said: Two men will be in the field; one will be taken and the other left. Two women will be grinding with a hand mill; one will be taken and the other left. "Therefore keep watch, because you do not know on what day your Lord will come. But understand this: If the owner of the house had known at what time of night the thief was coming, he would have kept watch and would not have let his house be broken into. So you also must be ready, because the Son of Man will come at an hour when you do not expect him. (Matthew 24:40-44. Believe what Jesus said and focus on that. Everything else is so much distracting flotsam and jetsam.

I think these words from Charles show clearly his sincerity and speaks volumes about where he is coming from:

"God always wants us to “stretch out our hands” to Him. A major point of what I try to get across is that God is close to YOU. If I persuade you to be dependent on me, then I have failed utterly. If I convince you that God is right at hand to YOU and that you have recourse to Him, then I am living my work well. God does send wisdom through me – but primarily so that when I assure you that He is close to you, you can believe it and turn to Him directly with confidence. We are fellow workers in His vineyard."

I refer to the article " The Great Apostasy Begins" by the alleged seer , Charlie Johnston.

The paragraph in question :

"Those who call themselves traditionalists think they are harking back to the original purity and practice of the Church. They are not. They simply prefer the startling liturgical innovations of 500 years ago to the startling liturgical innovations of 50 years ago – and think everyone else should, too."

That claim is totally false. Please read what Cardinal Ottaviani et al had to say about it at :

http://www.ewtn.com/library/curia/reformof.htm

By the way, that comment by Charlie is typical of many people who have only superficial ideas about the traditional liturgy.

I can only say that while I lean towards being conservative in my doctrinal/liturgical Catholic perspectives, I personally didn't think twice about that particular statement from Charlie, just because it is just an opinion and it is not contrary to doctrine/faith/morals.

And then too, while I tend to be traditional in my own Catholic perspectives, I am definitely not a "Traditionalist" Catholic, so I am not overly attentive to matters in this area. (In other words, I am very devoted to the Pope and I have no problem with Vatican II etc..)

But even if I did disagree with Charlie on this particular opinion of his, this would not take anything away from the possible authenticity of his alleged prophetic mission and message.

Thanks again for your comments. May Jesus bless you and your loved ones!-Glenn Dallaire

Glen, I am personally glad you allow the anonymous person to complain on your site.

I was puzzled as to why Mother of God forum had banned that anonymous poster.

Thank you because you have enabled me to understand the why.I can also see how your kindness and fairness gives someone a way to let off steam, and maybe come to understand 'it is better to live and let live'

Makes me wonder if "Lo, he or she protesteth too loudly" Maybe a soul searching too much, praying to little.

Hi Anonymous,Thank you for comments and the kind words. I like to leave everyone free to comment, because often one can gain a greater insight into things through other peoples perceptions and opinions.

I remember once reading how throughout the centuries, the Popes almost always form commissions before coming to any conclusions in doctrinal or other matters, having the desire to circulate widely for various opinions, because the Holy Spirit often speaks thorough the "sensus fidelum" (voice of the faithful).

And so that's the way of proceeding that I have tried to maintain in some small way here on this website also.

Thanks again and may God bless you and your loved ones,-Glenn Dallaire

Before Saints were declared saints, they wrote down their visions and inspiration's from God. It is true we should always discern but I believe God sends us modern day prophets not to scare us but to prepare us. Also I came across the following in scripture:

Joel 2:28 and repeated by Peter inActs 2:17. It says,

Joel 2:28The Lord Will Pour Out His Spirit28 "And it shall come to pass afterward,that I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh;your sons and your daughters shall prophesy,your old men shall dream dreams,and your young men shall see visions.

Acts 2: 17

17 "And in the last days it shall be, God declares,that I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh,and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy,and your young men shall see visions,and your old men shall dream dreams;

My rule of thumb is to avoid all self-proclaimed mystics. This is safe.

It seems imprudent to publish revelations that one has received. The saints never did (others did, usually after they had died).

I do not presume to know whether Mr Johnston has received authentic revelations, but I believe that, in this time of great deception - a deception that is being brought about, in part, through the instrumentality of false mystics - it is essential that we do not promote revelations that are dubious in any way.

I am not saying that we can distinguish with certainty between true and false revelations, but there are certain things that give credibility to alleged revelations, including:- The sanctity of the person(s) receiving the revelations (esp.their humility and obedience) - Surrounding miracles- Church approval

The children of Fatima, for example, were simple, albeit pious children, and their words were supported by a great miracle.

Just some food for thought. I have no disrespect for those who follow Mr Johnston.

I agree with much of what you said. For sure, as you well know, no one is required to believe in any private revelation, even in the ones fully accepted by the Catholic Church (such as Fatima, Lourdes etc). Although most everyone would agree that to disbelive in approved apparitions such as Fatima would be to the loss of that individual, because they only enrich ones spiritual life and devotion, as I am sure you would agree.

Now, as for waiting for Church approval for private revelations, well, Fatima was not officially approved until 1930 (13 years after).

So, was it wrong for all of the 60,000 people who crowded the Cova da Iria fields in Fatima on October 13 when "The Lady" promised a miracle, and they were all graced with a vision of the sun dancing? After all, at that time it was most certainly not "Church approved".

The point is, so long as a visionary has not spoken/written anything contrary to Church doctrine, and has not been officially condemned by the local Bishop, then the faithful are free to discern and judge for themselves, "despising not prophecy" as St Paul says "but taking from it what is good".

I did not mean to say that Church approval is necessary before we can pay attention to certain prophecies, but only that this is desirable, as it enhances their credibility and reliability.

The criteria I gave for assessing the credibility of private revelations are only my personal opinion, but I wanted to make it known, as I believe it is a safer alternative to reading or promoting writings that may not have been condemned, but which lack the qualities I mentioned.

To "B":I agree. It very wise to be prudent and cautious when it comes to private revelations, and waiting for Church approval is the safest approach.----------

To Anonymous above:I read where Charlie himself actually addressed this concern that you have pointed out. He wrote:"In my own case, over 90% of what I am directed I take full responsibility for myself. That way, if I tell you something and you reject me, you do not directly reject God and if I am deceived on a matter, I do not blame God for the deception. God is pleased by both the obedience and the humility.

There are times when God directs me to speak directly, either delivering a private or public message in His name. Nothing so discomfits me. Frequently, it is something I emphatically don’t want to say at all. In fact, I once complained to my angel that almost everyone I hear saying what God told them are only saying what they already wanted to in the first place. How come I get told to say so much stuff that makes my stomach rumble and they get it so easy? My angel’s response was instructive. “He didn’t send them. He does send you.” It often takes me a week or more to work up to saying, for attribution, what I am ordered to say in His name. First, I go to great pains to discern the validity of it, then I have to overcome my dread. It used to take me several days once I accepted it as authentic to say it: now I try to deliver such messages as quickly as I have accepted their authenticity, for they sit in my stomach like a rock until I am unburdened of them. Fortunately, they are fairly rare. I much prefer when God just gives me prompts on which information is currently useful for people to know and that I may profitably tell them – and leaves it to me to do my job right. I much prefer for Him to correct me when I have failed than to risk saying, in His name, what He does not command.

Often times, God speaks in more than a little whisper to console you or lift you up. If you can console another with it, well and good. But beware: if you start to deliver messages publicly, you will be held to a strict accounting for them. And if you speak what God did not direct you or give you leave to publicly say, even if it is good and true, you will be called to account. It is a fearsome thing."-----

We have been given the Church by Jesus Christ,the Sacraments, His Word, the Teachings and the witness of the Saints. Pray, lead a holy life with Joy and proclaim Christ and help souls come to know Him. Bring souls back to Jesus while there is still time. Stop thinking about these messages and look at what you can do to save souls. We could be called home tomorrow by God. Live the present moment and allow God to take care of tomorrow. God bless.

These ought to be dead giveaways that this can't possibly be authentic: he 1) attached a fixed date to the prophecy (when we know that not even Jesus was told the hour and the date of the end); and 2) is basically giving a prediction of peace and "cheap grace," where all these problems will be automatically solved for us (which is exactly what the false prophets of Old Testament times always predicted); and 3) it doesn't mesh at all with many of the extra details provided by other Catholic mystics, who spoke of wars in particular places, the French king etc. etc. 2 1/2 years isn't even enough time for Antichrist to show up and reign for 3 1/2 years. After all this, I would take anything else he says about theology with a grain of salt. I hate to sound uncharitable but he's either he's a lunatic who makes these things up off the top of his head, or worse, he's possessed. Either way, he's sowing tares. He clearly fails some point-blank tests of credibility, so we shouldn't lend him any. -- Steve

Given that this post has been pulled off the listings on the main page, perhaps Glenn has found something problematic in Johnston's messages. (One can only hope.)

That said, Steve, pretty much everything you just claimed is wrong.

1)Johnston clearly states that this will NOT be the end, so Jesus' admonition about the date and hour does not apply.

2)Johnston has claimed "cheap grace" only in the sense of "cheaper grace"--that is to say that grace, for the last century, has been inordinately expensive, due to Satan's having been granted that period of time. (And Johnston has been quite severe towards those who expect any sort of easy solutions in a more worldly sense afterwards.)

3)As these are not the end times, there's no particular need to try to match up the Antichrist and other end time prophecies/expectations.

As I said above, I would be thrilled if these turned out to be false. (One gets the sense Johnston would be, as well.) At the same time, though, when I compare him to false visionaries and mystics (see, for example, the article on this site about Sr. Magdalena of the Cross) the one contrast I keep coming back to is that he is submitting himself to the Church in general, and to his priest in particular.

He's doing everything right, and that leaves me unable to comfortably dismiss his claims...however much I would like to.

Hi Anonymous (directly above),With much attention I have researched Charlie and his writings, and to date I have not found anything contradictory to Church teaching. I HAVE had a couple of concerns to which I put forth to Charlie, and in my opinion he replied and addressed them in a satisfactory manner--Not that I am a judge in what concerns him, since I am simply a layman. I can only judge for myself, until when/if the Church makes a judgement concerning him.

And to those who are close minded towards prophets, I can only suggest that they reflect on the Scripture that states:"Indeed, the Lord GOD does nothing without revealing his plan to his servants the prophets." (Amos 3:7).

I too would love to dismiss Charlie's warning of a "Storm" that purportedly is soon to befall humanity, because if what he is given to warn us about it is in fact true, then we will all be undergoing a severe purification and suffering to the extent of which we cannot even imagine. And while this alleged Storm may be necessary and extremely beneficial for humanity as a whole on a spiritual level, on the temporal level there will be extreme suffering for all of us, and so from a human temporal---that is "material" perspective, no one in their right mind is anxious for something like this to happen. And so while I too would love to dismiss Charlie and his warning, I simply have not found anything that would give me grounds to do so. In fact, so far I have found quite the contrary.

I believe that Charlie Johnston has become less of a prophetic voice, and is more of just another opinionated blogger thesedays. Did you read his piece on vaccines and GM foods? Flimsy at best. He will lose a lot of his readers, myself included, if he continues his uninformed rants on subjects that he is not familiar with and have no bearing on the coming "storm".And for a prophet of the times, he is sorely lacking in humility. He may be intelligent, but let's not confuse intelligence for wisdom. If he has true prophecy, I'd love to read it. Otherwise, he loses readers and credibility when he goes "off the rails".

As to your first and also your last comment, that being essentially how you feel Charlie is "going of the rails" with his most recent articles as of late, I saw on Charlie's blog under the "Preparing for battle with hope" post, he addressed the matter with another commentator who pointed out the same thing:

In reply, Charlie stated:"charliej373 says:February 19, 2015 at 12:47 pmYou are very much on track, Fran. You have plumbed the fundamental reason for this. I let it flame up for a while….but this is NOT going to be a site that spends much time on such issues. When I bring them up as I did, I almost always have another purpose in mind. This post, “Preparing for Battle…” sums up much of it – and I thought it would be my summation. I was incorrect. I will have a brief formal message Saturday that is the heart of what I have been up to. I take responsibility for the formal messages that are required of me, unless I am specifically directed otherwise. You can tell when I am delivering a formal message because it always ends with, “I have told you true.”

This was necessary, but it is not the point – and will not be frequently indulged in."---------------------

In other words, perhaps the posts on GMO and vaccines are simply a vehicle to deliver a underlying message he is seeking to bring forth. I for one am interested to see what he will say about the matter on the post he promises to publish on the matter this upcoming Saturday.

It is not for me to give you advice but I do have to say that when it comes to someone like Charlie who may possibly be a prophetic voice, I personally have learned over the years that unless something someone like him is saying is obviously sinful or against Church doctrine, then such a matter is no reason to quickly dismiss him. God often works in mysterious ways that are not always familiar to us, or in ways that we do not expect. Sometimes if we give things a little time, then we see and understand.

Regarding Charlie Johnston, i have noticed that you jumped on the bandwagon in a heartbeat...ok, we are all looking for hope, signs, messages from God Almighty.

When i read Charlies posts, i feel peace...however, his commenters are becoming a cult. they are under the impression that when the storm comes, they are going to be on the giving end, than receiving...their families will all be together and they will tough it out. its getting weird. i understand when our spirit is disturbed or agitated, its not of God.

Charlie, will not respond to the elites remarks. im dismissing him because of this, not because of him.

reading undisciplened comments makes one weary and hopeless. we ask out here...."Why not me Lord, I want to help?" I cant read the comments on his website anymore, I just pray and go to mass.

I do know the satan can distort something very good and i do believe this is whats going on. the commenters which arent moderatered or maybe even reprimanded, theyre given full rein which has diminished, in my eyes his credibility.

Hi Matthew,Thank you for your very sincere comments. I understand and appreciate your concerns.

In reply, I will say only this: I have been very attentively studying Charlie's blog articles and his comments and I have privately been making, in writing, my own personal assessment concerning the possible authenticity (or lack thereof) of Charlie's purported prophetic mission. This private document is broken down into a number of different categories, in an attempt to assess all the different facets pertaining to his alleged mission. It currently is 15 pages long and is really a work in progress.

Up to this point, I have earnestly endeavored to be unbiased in my own discernment, simply documenting the facts as they are, and I hope to continue to do so. I don't intend at all for the document that I am creating to ever be published, as it is primarily for my own reference and discernment, allowing me to see, in an orderly way, what I personally find to be the positive and negative aspects and elements of what concerns Charlie's purported prophetic mission.

I will close by saying that I personally do not concern myself with other individuals commentary on Charlie's blog--my own personal evaluation is centered only on Charlie's writings concerning his mission, and not on others perceptions of it.

Thanks again for your very sincere comments and concerns.

As I believe I have stated in another comment above, there is one thing for certain: The purported Rescue (or lack thereof) will likely be THE most determining factor as to the authenticity (or lack thereof) of Charlie's prophetic mission. Also the proposed Chapel on Mt Meeker in the years afterwards would surely give very positive evidence.

Youre so easy to talk too, I have to add another comment and then I will keep harping on this subject.

My mother brought this to my attention, the point is..who are these commentators really following, believing in? I could bet on it, hypothetically of course, if Charlie Johnston said he needed $1,000 from each commentator...he would get it and MORE in a heartbeat. If he suggested anything, i suspect, it would be done. Jesus is slowly diminishing. This I do hold Charlie responsible for.... for not objecting to this worship behavior the people on the site are giving him..this is my red flag and others i know.

As I said, I will still read his posts because they are full of wisdom and direction, but will completely avoid the commentators.

At the core level, if one was to take nothing else from Charlie's message other than his central admonition which, as you know, is to: "Acknowledge(Trust)God, take the next right step, and be a sign of hope to those around you" or more simply put "Trust, Do, Love", I think one will have taken something good from the experience of reading about him and his writings, and by doing so one would be following St Paul's reccomendation "Do not despise prophecies, but test everything and hold fast what is good" (1 Thessalonians 5:19-21).

Another thought I myself try to keep in mind is that along with his priest-spiritual director, there are at least several priests and one retired Bishop reading his blog, along with it seems a few lay theologians, and so far to my knowledge no one up to this point has found anything contrary to Church doctrine or teachings in Charlie's writings.

One priest who has written to me privately commented how on occasions it seems that Charlie does in fact "skirt the edge of virtue" in certain areas, but he also quickly pointed out how many facets of Charlie's personality would in fact be quite suitable, and even necessary, for the purported mission he may be appointed to.

Once again, "time will tell" as the saying goes.

Thanks again Matt for sharing your thoughts and reflections. May God bless you and your loved ones,-Glenn Dallaire

Thank you for replying. Again, I dont want to personally put this man down as I do cherish his articles. Its the commentators that might be, being led astray.

When I read the comments, I think of the families in Syria being beheaded, their children, the refugees...everywhere but here in the United Sates. Do we really think the people being persecuted werent "pious" enough, didnt go to mass, confession...is that why theyre being beheaded? They didnt plan and make preparations effectively enough? A vast majority of the commentators seem to be living an illusion and Charlie is letting go awry...thats all Im saying.

I think Ill stick to the solid catholic sites such as yours, spirit daily and pelianito blogs.

I seriously dont mean to give you anymore "heat" about your article on Charlie Johnston, however,

the problem with this man is not about Charlie Johnston preaching anything contrary to the catholic faith. infact, he is very well versed and knows the faith inside and out.

so does satan and even moreso. the problem is this mans ego. he actually purrs when the commentators tell him how wonderful and holy he is..if not, he gets angry.

"by their fruits you shall know them"...his followers seem to be very cautious when commenting and actually seem to try and out do each other, vying for Charlies attention. its the strangest thing.

as Matthew Loper suggested, if this man is good and true, then he would pull the rein in on these people, theyre out of control with prepping and assuming theyre going to be this big massive soup kitchen for the world while everyone else suffers...

this is not about theological errors etc, its about personal character. and yes, i do have a problem with a man that says he has been visited by heavenly visitors for 50 years, but at the same time was having premarital sex with numerous women...he hisself admitted this. who would do that?

Hi Anonymous,Thanks for sharing your thoughts and perspective--and please NEVER be reluctant to point anything out out or "to give me any heat", as you stated. For, like you and many others, I seek only the truth with (hopefully!) always an open mind.

And, you are right that personal character always must be taken in consideration when discerning such persons. The question lies in whether or not God would use, as an instrument, a person who has fallen into serious sin at certain times in their life. As for myself, I personally do think that God *could* use such a person, so long as the person was deeply repentant for any sins that they may have committed through human weakness and frailty.

You pointed out the matter of fornication. It is my understanding that Charlie has lived in continence for quite a few years now.-Not that I am defending him: I am simply pointing out the current reality concering the matter.

Thanks again for your comments. May Jesus bless you and your loved ones,Glenn Dallaire

You said "..and i really dont care about his past 10 years of celibacy, he comments enough about women to make one shiver."---------------

Careful! What you are staing is slander and if it is not true it is a grave sin to make such a slanderous statement. I will have to reject and refute that statement outright because I have read quite a bit of Charlie's blog and accompanying comments, and I have not found even one single instance where he wrote about women "to make one shiver".

You would need to at least cite several instances to make the your statement truthful. Do you have some examples to corraborate what you are stating? If not, I would strongly encourge you to repent and confess the sinfulness of your false accusation (slander) to a priest in the Sacrament of Confession.

charliej373 says:March 11, 2015 at 11:24 pmThe difference between a book and a Kindle is the difference between a woman and a picture of a woman. Though I don’t snuggle with women any more – and won’t unless through some completely unexpected turn of events I were to be married again – I still snuggle with books…and when I do, I want the real thing.

Glenn, that personal attack on me was very unwarranted. You obviously have biased opinions.

I would think a man like this would be held to a bit higher standards than the rest of us and comparing a woman to a book/kindle is insulting. Im in my late 60's and a gentleman would never say something like this especially a so called prophet.

We are all seeking the truth and now youre telling me to go to confession.

Thank you for at least posting this comment. Again, I do like youre website and will stay away from Charlie Johnston.

Personally, I am not publicly endorsing Charlie and his proposed heavenly inspired messages--but I definitely am not denouncing him either. As far as this website goes, I am neutral. I have been reading his writings, and I have my own opinion about them, but I endeavor to keep my opinion to myself. But I do ask and encourage YOU, my dear readers, to post your thoughts and opinions here, so that things may be discerned from as many different perspectives as possible.- See more at: http://www.mysticsofthechurch.com/2014/12/charlie-johnston-alleged-prophet-with.html#sthash.J3XkvMlW.dpuf

this is a quote from you Glenn. now i am questioning your credibility. you do have comments on Charlies site and he does direct people to your site. Tit for Tat.

my goodness what has become of this world. it seems to be all about self promotion.

rosary for you,me,Charlie and everyone reading all of these confusing sites.

You said: "..and i really dont care about his past 10 years of celibacy, he comments enough about women to make one shiver."

So, the only statement from Charlie that you can come up with to support your allegation that slanders the character of Charlie is the following:----"March 11, 2015 at 11:24 pmThe difference between a book and a Kindle is the difference between a woman and a picture of a woman. Though I don’t snuggle with women any more – and won’t unless through some completely unexpected turn of events I were to be married again – I still snuggle with books…and when I do, I want the real thing."-----------

And this one comment from Charlie that you have produced is supposed to support your statement that he "comments enough about women to make one shiver."

Unless you find a more substatial comment from Charlie to support your allegation, the it is obvious to me that anyone who reads these comments will see the complete falsity of your accusation.

Its i important to understand something here:If a person makes a false statement that damages another persons character, then this is the sin of slander.

Anonymous said: ".and i really dont care about his past 10 years of celibacy, he comments enough about women to make one shiver."

I then told anonyymous "to be careful" stating: "You would need to at least cite several instances to make the your statement truthful. Do you have some examples to corraborate what you are stating? If not, I would strongly encourge you to repent and confess the sinfulness of your false accusation (slander) to a priest in the Sacrament of Confession."

This warning from me is justified. If a person makes a statement that willfully damages another persons reputation, most especially without facts to support it, is commiting the of slander. Go and look it up in the catechism.

As far as commenting on Charlie's site, I have only commented on Charlie's site two times, and both comments were on ancillary matters and were not in support of Charlie's alleged mission. So no, there is no "tit for tat" as you stated.

As I have stated numerous times here in these comments, I am not for or against Charlie. I simply believe in giving person a fair and honest hearing---but one thing I do react to is unjustified comments that attack a persons character unjustly.

If "Anonymous" had proof to back his/her statement against Charlie's character, then he/she should have provided it. What anonymous did provide was a statement that did not make his/her case at all.

I dont know how anyone knows if Glenn is trying to block emails, I think you, anonymous are jumping to conclusions.

I do know that when a person has self interest involved in a matter, they tend to become defensive. Glenn, Im sorry but this seems to be the case with you. You seem to be talking out of two sides of your mouth.

I checked out everything these people are saying and...theyre correct. You are not.

I am now questioning much of your website and validity. Are the articles you write a biased or unbiased opinion? I dont know now.

I have no prob with Charlie Johnston, he is straight and to the point. He doesnt try to please everyone, however, his commentators are the people pleasers that I have an issue with.

Im praying for you and everyone involved. Please Glenn, stop attacking people that dont agree with you. You are not a woman so I assume you wouldnt be so offended as this lady is.

I will not dig further into this matter, but I was alerted to another comment Mr. Johnston made about being in a bar with a girlfriend who claimed he was cheating on her and he made a comment about how unattractive the bartender was.......I will mail the link to you if you like.

For the record, I corresponded with Glenn by email a few times, and accusing him of blocking emails is ridiculous. He has been nothing but fair and open-minded.

My mind still isn't made up about Charlie, but I noticed the strange behavior among the commentators some time ago, like Matt did. This is because they came from places like the Mother of God forum and Spirit Daily, which in my opinion, promote "apparition chasing" and trying to map out the future. Charlie discourages these things, but they do it anyway.

Please don't use this to agitate Glenn and drag his site down. You must remember that most site/forum owners are not as fair as Glenn is.

Well, I can honestly state that I am definitely not blocking any emails or comments on this article.

If one was to read through my comments, one would see that the point in all of this is very simple. If a person states, for example, that Charlie is lacking in humility (again just for an example), then one should give several good and pertinent examples in support of their statement. "Anonymous" did not.

Now, as far as myself being biased in favor of Charlie, as I mentioned in an earlier comment, I have a 15 page private document that I have created for my own discernement, and I can say that there is a portion of it that details certain things that I personally find concerning in regrads to Charlie and his alleged mission.

My intention and goal in regards to every purported mystic I evaluate amd write about is to seek out the truth, and in this I always appreciate the perspectives of others, so long as they are made charitible and justly, WITH PERTINENT FACTS to support one's position/comments.

I understand that this is your forum and I also understand that Charlie has his own forum...however, that is opening oneself up to other opinions, comments etc that may be different than yours.

Noone has falsely and unjustly accused anyone. This lady made a comment about Charlie and had the means to back it up. You came at her like a pit bull.

I wrote you in an earlier email that I was alerted to another inappropriate comment he made about women. If you would like to see it, I will give you my personal email because I see where your attacks are going publicly.

As I said Glenn, you have a personal investment in Charlies site, its documented and all who read this...just go to Charlies, read comments and Mr. Glenn is on there.

This is hypocritical and I will not return sadly.

Put it to rest about this woman having a different opinion than yours. You are clearly in the wrong on this. Man up as they say.

I never accussed Mr. Johnston of his past, just his present behavior about women and i did provide you evidence and proof. You ignored it.

I am 67 years old. I have never, ever in my life been attacked so much by...men. Men seem to have no respect for a lady anymore.

You sir, are one of them.

Your site means nothing to me now that I know who is behind it. You can put your crosses up and quote the Blessed Mother all you want....your actions are deplorable. You are the example of a sheep in wolves clothing. I have to ask, are you getting money from commenting on Charlies site?

Yvonne ("Anonymous"),Since you posted as "Anonymous" I never even knew whether you were a woman or a man...and if you read my comments to you, you would see that I never "attacked" you in any way. You seem to be overlooking the whole problem with your original post with its accusation concerning Charlie WITH NO SUPPORTING FACTS---You accused Charlie stating the following: ------"..and i really dont care about his past 10 years of celibacy, he comments enough about women to make one shiver." ------

And, for my part, I immediately called you to task on your statement, because YOU GAVE NO EVIDENCE IN YOUR ORIGINAL POST TO BACK UP YOUR STATEMENT, and when you eventually did post one comment from Charlie, it did not even support your original accusation!

If, as you say, Charlie allegedly "comments enough about women to make one shiver." then YOU SHOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE TO CITE AT LEAST SEVERAL COMMENTS TO BACKUP your statement. And you couldn't even produce one solid one!

And then you have the nerve to accuse me of attacking you? You are the one attacking the character of others (Charlie), and then now you have turned your accusations to myself, without providing any evidence supporting your accusations.

So, Yvonne "Anonymous", I hope you at least learned not to post on this website drive-by character assassinations concerning others without supporting your statements WITH FACTS THAT PERTAIN TO WHAT YOU ARE STATING. And no, I am not sorry for bringing you to task on this matter, because like I stated at the beginning of my comments to you, slander is a sin, so hopefully next time you will at least think first and give supporting facts before you accuse someone of a certain fault.

As for myself, I am confident that any who may read your comments and my replies will readily see who is at fault here. At the very least this discourse of ours will hopefully prevent any other person from making drive-by character attacks without supporting facts. So, hopefully some additional good can be drawn from this correspondence of ours.

And to reply to your last accusation concerning me:----You said "You are the example of a sheep in wolves clothing. I have to ask, are you getting money from commenting on Charlies site?"-------

And here you go again making accusations without any justification. But to reply, no, I do not make any money whatsoever by commenting on Charlie's site. But now I should have to ask you something: Are you ever ashamed of accusing people falsely, without having any facts to support your accusations?

Actually, please do me a favor and don't reply to my question. It's better if we just end our correspondence at this point.

Dear Matt,I am sorry, but those who read your comments will see that YOU really seem to be obviously overlooking cetain matters, and although you accuse me of a certain bias, I think your comments show a slant.

You say: "Anonymous" made a comment about Charlie and had the means to back it up"

Really??? "Anonymous" didn't even give anything to back up her statement until I brought her to task on it, and then she came back with *one* single comment that didn't even support her accusation. Once again, lets remind you of Anonymous' accusation:------"..and i really dont care about his past 10 years of celibacy, he comments enough about women to make one shiver." ------

And so I will tell you what I told "Anonymous":If Charlie allegedly "comments enough about women to make one shiver." then ANONYMOUS SHOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE TO CITE AT LEAST SEVERAL COMMENTS TO BACKUP her statement. And she couldn't even produce one solid one!

And might I also point out that "ANONYMOUS" statement was plural, so one statement of Charlie's would not even suffice anyway, even if it was pertinent.

Secondly, like "Anonymous", you too make accusations without backing them up with facts. You said:"As I said Glenn, you have a personal investment in Charlies site, its documented and all who read this...just go to Charlies, read comments and Mr. Glenn is on there."

As I stated in an earlier message, I have made only 2 comments on Charlie's site, and both were on ancillary matters--I have not in any way supported Charlie or his purported mission on his website. So like "Anonymous", you throw out accusations without facts to back them up.

And then you add to this by accusing me of being biased? I would urge others who might hav any concern in this matter to read your past few comments above, and I think the truth about who is biased, and who makes accusations without supporting facts, will be quite obvious.

In defense though, there is another inappropriate comment Mr. Johnston made and you were asked if it could be sent to you. You didnt reply. Then you turn around and say there are accusations without proof. You ignored the proof.

You are lashing out and its very unbecoming. You said you knew you would have to take some heat about Charlie Johnston so here it is. I told you, I really enjoy his articles, there is nothing in my minimal knowledge that is contrary. The comments and commentators are a problem.

As a woman, I do not like the way he speaks to them and I do not like the way you are speaking to a woman. Then again, thats the sign of the times.

Good luck with your site. You are trailing down the wrong path Glenn, your anger is showing.

You said "In defense though, there is another inappropriate comment Mr. Johnston made and you were asked if it could be sent to you. You didnt reply. Then you turn around and say there are accusations without proof. You ignored the proof."------

The fact is, in his comments Matt had included the comment from Charlie that he was referring to.

Here is what Matt stated:"I will not dig further into this matter, but I was alerted to another comment Mr. Johnston made about being in a bar with a girlfriend who claimed he was cheating on her and he made a comment about how unattractive the bartender was.....I will mail the link to you if you like."----

I had already read the comment from Charlie that Matt was referring to, and so I did not need him to email it to me---I knew exactly what comment from Charlie that he was referring to.

And here it is for those who may be interested:----------"Once a woman I was dating accused me, in public, of having an affair with a very homely bartender. She was a little tipsy, so I tried to defuse it and was patient, When she persisted, I finally burst out with, “For crying out loud, I can live with you accusing me of cheating, but I will not tolerate your accusing me of having such poor taste!”-------------------

AND SO THIS IS THE PROOF THAT CHARLIE IS UNKIND TOWARDS WOMEN THAT YOU SAY THAT I AM IGNORING? And so I ask the readers here--is this a statement that is intentionally uncharitable or unkind towards women, or is it simply a lighthearted story? I personally think it is very obvious that it is the latter.

Glenn, I said earlier on in the comments here that it was interesting that some "anonymous" commenters were attacking Charlie, you and the message. I asked myself why that would happen? I think your take on it to just post the words of Charlie and let them stand on their own is spot on. So why are some so vehement in trying to silence, and now to attack Charlie's character?

I suspect the reason is sinister. Nothing wrong with publicizing Charlie's advice and letting his words stand on their own.

FWIW, I also try to just read Charlie's words and replies and I don't read most of the comments as it seems to me that a lot of people are posting or using the comments section to write their own blogs. I get no anxiety from Charlie's columns, that's a good sign. I got a bad feeling reading some of the comments above attacking Charlie. That's very telling

From what I can see, Charlie spends his time seeking to do good and helping others, offering sound Catholic advice and encouragement to people. I have yet to see anything written by him against Catholic teaching or morals. Joseph

I've been reading Charlie for a while and I think he is the real deal. His message is important and he is doing what God has asked of him. He doesn't try to get people to follow him but he is only a guide for this unique time. All are free to believe him or not but to dismiss it is, I believe, a mistake. Mack

im not explaining myself very well. I have no problem with Charlies posts, theyre inspiring. I do believe he needs to pull hisself in...hes unbridled. he does have a very extensive history of "women". thats not judging, its a fact and its coming out in his comments.

ive never ever heard of a mystic, prophet with this kind of shady background no matter what he says.

please stop attacking me and saying i dont agree with his posts, i do. i do.

satan seems to be rearing his ugly head here. Charlie just had a post tonight of being slandered. Google his name. noone is slandering, just exposing.

To Anonymous who said:"real funny. this is a so called prophet cracking jokes about women?"------

I see that I probably should have cited Charlie's entire statement so that it can be seen in context. His statement was a comment he made in his blog concerning a Twitter account that apparently got hacked. Here is his comment in its entirety:

charliej373 says:January 20, 2015 at 3:10 pmI think I have figured out what happened. I think I was hacked by someone who figured out my password for the email account – so I have changed it to something I have not used before. I hope that will end it, but I would rather just have the account removed entirely. If any of you see anything else weird ever pop up, PLEASE let me know right away. I use email, Facebook, and do have an account on Linked In that I almost never use. Obviously I have the WordPress account and a Gravatar Account I am pretty sure that is all social media accounts I am linked to. But I do have a few cyberstalkers that you (fortunately) never see. In the end, nothing has any power over any of us that God does not allow – but sometimes it can be aggravating.

Once a woman I was dating accused me, in public, of having an affair with a very homely bartender. She was a little tipsy, so I tried to defuse it and was patient, When she persisted, I finally burst out with, “For crying out loud, I can live with you accusing me of cheating,,,but I will not tolerate your accusing me of having such poor taste!”--------------------

Now, the reason for the last part of Charlie's comment was because on his Twitter account that was hacked there was one "follower" who account name was "She-Male###" and the accompanying photo was of a half-woman half-man (it was difficult to tell what gender the person was). And so, the last part of his comment is in reference to this fact, and when seen in this light his comment is quite appropriate and understandable, I think.

advice..ask your wife about this. noone is putting down Charlies post etc. his character is in question. he does have a documented history with women, women that really dont have good things to say about him. is that a prophet we want?

Dear Anonymous (in the comment directly above),This will have to serve as my last warning to you and to anyone else who makes unsubstantiated claims and accusations. Either you produce facts that are pertinent to your claims, or such future comments will be immediately deleted. I cannot tolerate slander, false accusations, and bearing false witness here on this website.

But for the sake of serious conversation and dialogue with those who are truly interested in discerning Charlie and his purported mission, I will now have to also delete spam messages also, I see. So, sorry, but you will have to go away now. Your "spamming mission" is complete.

I'm appalled by what has happened here. Not at you, Glenn. Seems like the devil has tried to infiltrate.

Don't mudsling and throw around unfounded accusations against Charlie. If you're confused or feel anxiety about the messages, pray for Charlie and pray for guidance. He doesn't deserve this kind of foul treatment.

Hmmmm, it seems to me that in reading both blogs, it's the negative commentators here who are suffering from the "Pharisee /Saducee" syndrome. A quick prayer asking the Holy Spirit for guidance and charity will help all of us brothers and sisters in Christ to speak to and about one another in kindness. And if we think deep in our hearts that the commentators in Charlie's sight are wrong, then as Christians , it would be wise to pray for them. It will make God happy for sure.

I personally am on the fence about Charlie. I have read his blog for a while. I will say his basic advice which is trust God, go to God before you do anything, and then take the next best action that you can is wonderful advice in any time -Great Storm or not.I have a basic question though. I have now read Charlie's blog and something called the Locutions which both suggest a Great Storm that is coming. Can anyone specifically direct me to an approved (maybe not approved) Marian apparition (or something similar) that first introduced the concept of the Great Storm? I would like to trace the concept beginnings and get as much information on it as possible. I am concerned that many current prophecies seem to discuss this but I have never heard any official church teachings on the topic. Thank you!

in my experience, when I see this type of vitriol directed at a person trying their best to do God's will, I take a closer look at that person, sit up and listen even more attentively. satan tends to attack those who work counter to his purpose. you tend not to see such drama around people helping satan. these above type of unsubstantiated mean spirited attacks may claim to be " for our protection" but they feel more like poorly executed attempts to manipulate away from something that may merit a closer look and be spiritually helpful in our faith walk.

I think we do well to trust the Church's direction, which permits the faithful to discern on our own unless/until they advise otherwise. (not withstanding the above cut and paste attempt to convey something to the contrary). I have followed Charlie for many months, I post regularly, I don't send him money and he never ask. I am open to hearing about legitimate concerns or current behaviors that are problematic. but old statements about a conversation in a bar or current ones about a kindle hardly rise to more the general chitchat and are not such. those can can somehow find offense at those statements seem to be seeking unmerited victimhood or enjoy false indignity.

I know two very orthodox bishops that follow Charlie, plus a few priests and deacons. they have made know to me they find Charlie's blog helpful. if a Bishop can state that (even if he is outside the immediate chain of command regarding Charlie's alleged visitations, (his priest, local ordinate, the CDF, and the Pope are the chain of command). then I'm comfortable following his post and the comments which are very encouraging and most typically point us to seek and do God's will in humilty, obedience and prayerful charity. how can a Christian take serious objection to that. so I ask the naysayers either provide some meaningful and substantiated evidence of false teachings or wrong doings over the last 10 years or just leave Charlie and those that follow his blog in peace. it's ok if you don't follow his blog, just don't feel like that means you have to seek and destroy so that no one does.

one final point, many of the Prophets and Saints had some pretty bad behavior before they accepted God's calling: Moses, David, St Peter, St Paul, St Augustine, St Francis to name just a few. Thank goodness we don't all have to live the perfect lives of Mary and Joesph to be loved and granted mercy by God. Or to be useful to him. :-)

Hi Glenn,Some of the people commenting on your article seem concerned about Charlie's less than perfect past and this is understandable. However, I would like to mention something they may have overlooked here. A reader mentions that Charlie claims angelic visitations and yet still fell from grace despite the extraordinary gifts he has been given and I'd like to note that in this current age many Catholics have done the same despite being given a far greater gift than angelic visitations - millions of people receive the Eucharist, Christ himself, and still fail in virtue, including the virtue of purity. So whose would be the greater sin? (I believe Charlie is a convert to Catholicism.) I'd go so far as to say that a great majority of people in this world today are LACKING in virtue. Thus "the storm". What I read in these comments seems to be a case of "shooting the messenger", a reluctant one at that (and I can see why) and not taking personal responsibility for our own actions which have contributed to the state we find the world in today. I'm not sure pointing fingers at Charlie for having the same fallen nature the rest of us have is the best way to discredit him. It says more about oneself than about him. We don't see what God sees and we don't know why God chooses certain people for specific missions but I do note that Charlie has one particular virtue in spades and that is the virtue of courage.

What actually puzzles me is not the people who believe we are in the midst of a "great storm" but rather the people who do NOT see this. At this point I don't think there is any doubt that humanity is in great trouble. The signs are written everywhere, especially on humanity itself.

I started reading Charlie's site in 2014. I have known for years that we are in a "great storm". I have to admit that the timeline Charlie gives takes me aback a bit but the fact that we are in a storm of epic proportions does not. No doubt others have noticed the same and this may be why Charlie's words ring true for a lot of people.

As for the readers who comment on Charlie's site - they are a great bunch. Yes, they (and I) have their quirks and idiosyncrasies but they also have a lot of heart and that seems to be hard to come by these days. I think the person who commented negatively on the people who read Charlie's blog does them an injustice and underestimates their intelligence and commitment to the Lord. Personally, one of the reasons I read The Next Right Step is BECAUSE of the people who comment there. Their words hearten me greatly and I have noticed how quick they are to reach out to others, especially those who are suffering in some way.

All of this aside, the REAL storm we are battling with is the storm of sin in our own hearts. The outer storm is simply a reflection of the inner one every person on earth is facing. May God give us each the courage to see this. (And thank you Pope Francis for the upcoming Year of Mercy in 2016 which will go a great distance in helping us do so!)

Thank you for a great site, Glenn - I read it regularly and appreciate all you do here.

Hi Mary N,Thanks so much for your very thoughtful commentary. I think that there is a great deal of wisdom in your remarks, and I think one would do very well to reflect upon what you have stated.

As far as Charlie purportedly receiving heavenly visitations back in the years when he was battling with impurity, I think that your comments concerning most of us who actually receive Jesus in the Eucharist--yet still struggle greatly with impurity--is a excellent analogy. I think also the comment that Charlie made concerning this matter also explains things quite well--For those who did not read it, Charlie stated:

[Charlie was asked how it is that he could have received visitations while he was battling with sexual impurity] .." I don’t know. I just know what happened. Even so, how did St. Augustine effective preach the Gospel for several years while living the same sin? How did David keep friendship with God even while living much greater sin? Shoot, God even told David at one point while he was mourning the loss of his son that, yeah, he was a terrible sinner, but that that wasn’t getting him out of his work…to get up, wash his face, and do his job.

I think my son’s comments on it from a few years ago captured the best I can think of. God knew that I would eventually let it go…He also knew that these times when such disorder is so common called for someone who had lived it and overcome in order to hope more. I don’t know. I know that some of my misbehavior was because I liked it…but my little secret is that some of my disorders were a feeble effort to get myself disqualified. Only a few people really understand how the advent of these times scared me and how desperately I wanted to get out of what I promised. That is how it has happened.....

...But in the end, I can only tell you how things have been. Then you must decide whether the message bears hearing or not."---------------------------

As far as the great "Storm" that Charlie prophesises, I often think of the words of Jesus:------(Luke 12:54) Jesus said to the crowds, "When you see a cloud rising in the west, you say at once, 'A rainstorm is coming,' and so it does.-------

Well, like Charlie and many others, I see the "clouds" giving sign that a great Storm is coming. And those who have eyes to see, ought to see it...

Thanks again for your excellent commentary Mary N. You have given much food for reflection.

Thank you for your inspiring and insightful site and also for including Charlie Johnston on it. I do not think I would have come across him otherwise and I have found so much wisdom there.

I have a few thoughts about some of the comments. One of the big problems in our society and even our Church is that we no longer call a sin a sin. Slander is rarely called the serious sin it is. Many of us just say what we want without thinking through the real consequences of that, neither for the person we are talking about nor the person we are talking about. There is no easy way to do this, but I think it was a real service to the woman who was saying unfounded things about Charlie. I think your corrections were appropriate and can serve as good advice to all that is is important to chose our words carefully.

Also, everyone at least seems to agree that Charlie is a serious, devout, prayerful, obedient Catholic who is 100% true to the Catholic Church. Since he is under the spiritual direction of 3 priests, I have to assume he goes to confession regularly. As such, anything he has confessed is forgiven and forgotten by God. So, if God has forgotten, what right do people have to dig up stuff as if it was a current, ongoing news event?

God does not choose people for special missions because of worthiness or holiness, or for having an unblemished past. He chooses people who have proven to be faithful and obedient so His job can get done. We can't do anything on our own anyway. God can clean up our past. No problem. The one thing He won't do though is make our choices which is why obedience is so important a trait of someone who has a special mission, like a prophet. As has been pointed out, the future is unfolding pretty quickly and 2017 is just around the corner so we will all find out soon enough if this is all for real. In the meantime though Charlie has shown obedience over and over again.

I've been reading Charlie for months. He is a faithful Catholic. If Jesus waited for the perfect candidates we would not have the Catholic Church. He is the perfect guide for our times and never exploits his 'mysticism' for any purpose. Whatever the church decides about Charlie likely won't happen in our lifetime so he is held to the same standards as any lay Catholic and that is his 'obedience' to the church and it's teachings and that, he is.

While I don't find Charlie's struggles to be an automatic disqualifier, they do raise two major concerns for me.

First: There is widespread agreement among the saints that sins of lust cloud the intellect, particularly with regard to spiritual matters. Contrast that with Charlie's own testimony, particularly of his lifelong perceptive abilities (with the exception of the year after he joined the Church, when they were stripped from him as a test). Even with his disclaimers about his own fallibility, something doesn't add up here.

Second: I do not necessarily have a problem with the idea of Charlie receiving visits when he had fallen into sin. However, the content of those visits would seem to be something that needs to be clarified. I can't imagine Gabriel, Jesus, or Mary speaking to him when he was in a state of grave sin (likely mortal sin) and not at the very least rebuking him in some fashion!

Hi Anonymous (directly above),You raised a very sincere concern, that being the *content* of the messages of the visitors during the time period where Charlie was struggling with impurity, that being that you feel that the visitors would have directly addressed the matter of impurity with Charlie, given that his actions at that time were a matter of serious sin.

It would be difficult for me to personally answer this concern, since obviously these events do not concern me personally, but fortunately Charlie responded to this concern via two emails, and afterwards he agreed to allow me to post portions of his emails as a reply to your concern. So, if interested here is Charlie's reply:----------------------"Hi Glenn,

Your latest commenter asked a very solid question that, I think, deserves an answer - about whether or not my visitors ever rebuked me for the sexual sins. As bad as it may sound, the answer is no...they never mentioned it. It is not that they never chided or rebuked me - they did. I was chided if I neglected or ignored my work - what I had promised. Gabriel, in particular, would show obvious disappointment if I misinterpreted or misunderstood something I should have had enough experience to understand properly. The thing that was guaranteed to get a quick correction was if I treated someone with dismissal or contempt...made them feel "less than." I don't mean to say I was supposed to be sweet to everyone - that was not necessary at all; but to always be fully conscious of their humanity and recognize it.

They certainly never approved of my nonsense...and there were times when I really expected to be whacked for it. But, I don't know, I got the feeling as if they were determined not to notice...kind of like a kid who wets the bed occasionally, that they expected me to grow out of it....

...Anyway, I think your reader asked a fair question - and it set off some thoughts in my head, too. I think there are serious, but transient sins that the Lord expects us to get over and grow out of if we grow in love...sins of weakness and appetite I will call them. But sins of vanity, malice...snootily looking down your nose at someone...these are things I WAS held to a rigorous account on. I think maybe because with malice, vanity and snootiness, you deform the very capacity to grow in love, so even when they are not as big and showy as the sins of weakness, if they take root they can come to dominate you...

It is a legit question - and frankly one I had wondered at at times. It kind of reminded me of my Dad. If he yelled at you, that wasn't great...but when you deserved yelling at and he said nothing, somehow that was worse. I didn't answer directly because I like to keep relatively reticent in comment on articles directly about me. And this is a puzzle: my thoughts on it could be self-serving...or it might be that God wants us to see a little more clearly: not that grave sin is not grave, but that we routinely engage in sin that is far more deadly and often call it righteousness.[End of exerpts from two email messages from Charlie Johnston]--------------

I hope this helps a bit to clarify the matter. May God bless you and your loved ones,-Glenn Dallaire

I find Charlie to lack humility and is far too defensive.. His blogs are way too political. For the type of message he proclaims and it's seriousness I find the audience too narrow. In one of his posts I believe he stated that the time of mercy was dependent upon him reaching a certain mountain top. I guess it could have been a trial for him, but I have difficulties with that. No way to disprove it of course.

Anon from March 23: This is what you're referring to. (I have problems with it as well, but I'm not sharing them - this post is informational only.)

When I was on my pilgrimage, I very much dreaded going to the top of Mt. Meeker. I had been told that when I reached the summit – which I was directed to climb to – the gates of mercy would be shut and the Storm would enter into the fulness of its fury. The sides people had chosen by this time would be hardened. One could still get back to the side of faith, but it would be much harder and entail much sacrifice – and few would make it successfully.

I am obedient. I walked across the country with serious neurological damage. But I dreaded this. I had also lived, since childhood, the agreement that I would obey any legitimate authority on earth when it exercised legitimate authority in contradiction to what I had been ordered. This is not as shocking as you might think. God can melt legitimate authorities objections – and on several occasions He has when it was necessary. It is humble submission, keeping my feet on the ground, and not becoming an unaccountable law unto myself.

I suffer an often hidden disability. I could not walk up the mountain and back in a single day. So I was walking up and camping during the Novena. The third day, I was confronted with National Park Rangers who rousted me at gunpoint, for camping was not allowed beyond a certain area. Once they realized I was harmless, everything was fine. But I was not allowed to camp close enough to the summit to be able to make it up and back in a single day, given my disability. I was utterly delighted. I had to feel something like my namesake, Abraham, did when the Lord pulled his hand back from Isaac. For the last few months of my pilgrimage, I dreaded getting to the top…it felt like I was going to be spiritual executioner to many. The Lord used my normal obedience to legitimate authority to spare me this. On the fifth day, I did as best I could, regardless. I got above the tree line, but I clearly could not make it to the top and get back down before it was deep dark – and I had already encountered four bears in the mountain. So I never reached the summit.

During the rest of the Novena I was given to know that because of my obedience throughout the way, because of my fidelity to normal legitimate authority, and because of the prayers of many, God would shorten the number of days in the fulness of the agony of the Storm. And he would leave the gates of mercy open for people to cross back over easily into the faith and truth. But had I stubbornly defied normal authority and snuck up to the summit as I had first promised, the gates of mercy would have been closed and the Storm would have commenced with full fury.

We have more things to worry about than Charlie Johnston. I have no opinion either way.

I do know i do not visit his site anymore because he tends to be, less than humble. to me, hes like an alex jones or maybe rush limbaugh, very well meaning and good men, but....i do know if you make this man mad, he will retaliate. i have emails.Nevertheless, i wish you would keep writing about our true mytics, etc. Not this nonsense.

I came to the end of a fairly long (five months) discerning process with Charlie, and I got a red flag waving itself madly at me the other day.

It was this:

I am deeply endeared to Medjugorje primarily because of the fruits – but also because back in 1993, two years before I shared these things with anyone, while I still thought Medjugorje was a carnival tourist trap, my angel that “Lourdes, Fatima and Medjugorje are all manifestations of a single event.” When I objected about Medjugorje, he chuckled and said, “It carries the barnacles of these times, but it is authentic.”

This comment goes against what Bishops Zanic and Petric have discerned, and the 1991 declaration by the Yugoslav Episcopal Conference, which still is in effect today: "It cannot be affirmed that these matters concern supernatural apparitions or revelations."

So who to believe: an alleged heavenly visitor or the Bishops? And why would an angel state something contrary to God's representatives on earth? It doesn't add up.

So I think something is awry here, and my discernment led me to believe that Charlie's messages from childhood were pure and real, but something else got in there down the line.

It reinforced my decision to pray, stay close to the Sacraments, and ordinary spirituality.

The things that were being said made me feel too anxious and helpless. As I said, when that red flag popped up, I knew it was time for me to go.

And yes, Mary, I noticed that Charlie had a tendency to growl at people who didn't believe what he said. I can see how it would upset him, because he's been allegedly receiving these messages and directives for 50 years, but his growling at them still took me back a bit. (A recent example was someone criticizing his advice from the "Watcha Gonna Do When They Come For You" two-parter.)

Thanks Glenn for your post! People should remember that all mystics had faults! St. Peter had a temper - remember he cut off someone's ear. St Augustine had a problem w women. St padre pio complained about his own temper and he is incorruptible. It's states that mr Johnston has nerve damage- that pain would put anyone in a bad mood. R we Christian or r we Christian - I like to assume the best in people unless gross negligence was proven.

Ps - this man sounds authentic to me and mirrors other prophets had said -Summer 2015 starts with possible nuclear upheaval lets pray that away!!!

I have basically given up on Mr. Johnston. He is now traveling in the southeast and asking for money to stay at hotels, expenses, etc. Fine, but the line is drawn now. I was hoping he was true. This is disappointing.

Glenn, Jesus didnt ask for money to support his living expenses. Just saying.

As I have mentioned in the article above and in the subsequent comments, I remain neutral in my position towards Mr. Charlie Johnston. However it is also my responsibility as having published this article to consider all concerns brought forth by others concerning the mission of Mr. Johnston, and to bring forth the truth concerning them.

Now, for those who unfamiliar with the latest development which Mary is speaking of, it concerns Charlie's plans to visit certain areas of the country where he is invited to speak. Mary's specific concern relates to the $300 offering which Charlie has asked the sponsoring host/group to make, to cover his travelling costs. The details of this can be read in the article entitled Guidelines for Hosts on Visits.

Honestly, I don't think that you will find many people to support your position that $300 to cover Charlie's travel costs to another part of the country is being unreasonable. In the article he explains that he will be travelling in the cheapest manner possible, either by bus or train (and not flying, which is normally more expensive), and that he will be staying in a modest motel/hotel, like a "Super 8" or similar accommodation.

Irregardless, I am sure most everyone would agree that $300 is very reasonable to cover the costs of one's travel expenses and accommodations.

After all, he is going to places where he is being invited and asked to come by individuals and groups wishing to meet him and hear him speak. It is only natural that the hosts sponsoring and making this request for a visit should help fund such an endeavor.

So, I simply do not find any solid basis for the concern that you raise.

Thanks again for your comment. May God bless you and your loved ones,-Glenn Dallaire

I agree with Mary. Even more concerning however is the selling of bumper stickers, buttons and monstrances which is now taking place as well as the development of a logo. 12And Jesus entered the temple and drove out all those who were buying and selling in the temple, and overturned the tables of the money changers and the seats of those who were selling doves. 13And He said to them, "It is written, 'MY HOUSE SHALL BE CALLED A HOUSE OF PRAYER'; but you are making it a ROBBERS' DEN."… If anything needs to be sold it is copies of the Bible.

That bumper sticker surprised me when I saw it. If I didn't know it was associated with a Catholic, I wouldn't know what to think of it. Cult? Perhaps?

Also concerning was yesterday's post, with Charlie confirming himself as a climate change skeptic and evolution denier. I don't understand why he's doubling down on this position when St. JPII and our current Pope both clearly stated that evolution isn't inconsistent with creation.

I found this post at Catholic Answers on the "End Times Speculation - Part 20" thread that I think gets to the heart of what has been bothering me about this particular seer and all these unapproved locutions/visions/devotions:

With private locutions and supernatural messages being reported from many folks from around the world, some with a spiritual director monitoring, some with permission to publish from local priests, but no idea how orthodox or spiritually advanced these priests are. Anyhow...

These messages (from very famous, but not yet approved, to not so famous) all accomplish one thing:

--they distract from the main fire.

They are all "good" on the surface, praying and preaching and guiding in a "good" direction or trouble spot, there's no fault to be found. However, they are a deception designed for distraction.

There is something smoldering, large, fuming that requires serious prayer and attention (fasting, penance, etc.)...but the Church Militant is being splintered off effortlessly into dozens of directions following assorted messages and locutions.

The poster also said, something I'm in total agreement with, to stick with Church-approved prayers and devotions.

This other stuff has too great of a chance of replacing what the Church promotes, and I'm afraid that's what's happening with the Next Right Step site.

I disagree. We all have the right to decide whether it is worthwhile or not, but as mentioned before it was decided after mulling over, this is not the action of an irresponsible person. You decide as I will whether any information given is pertinent, at least it was given.

I really respect and admire all of the work youve done throughout the years. However, I think now, you are speaking out of two sides of your mouth Im sorry to say.

You stated in a comment that you remain neutral in regards to Charlie Johnston. However, if one visits his site, lo and behold there you are. you even hosted a visit or met with him in MA if im correct.

Be honest with us Glenn, dont play both sides. If you support this man, okay. But, if you tell your readers youre neutral but behind the scenes you are not, thats just blantant deception. Be careful my friend.

Hi Anonymous,I appreciate your frank and sincere comments. But you can be assured that there is no deception in my words or actions. I would like to point out that I have not made any comments on this website or elsewhere in favor of, or against Charlie. I did (very gladly!) meet with him on July 26th, and we spent a good part of the day together travelling in the car and visiting the Divine Mercy Shrine in Stockbridge, MA. It gave me the opportunity to privately question Charlie on a number of matters concerning his purported prophetic mission, to which he answered all of my questions patiently and sincerely.

One has to understand that when you are Dora the Explorer, you explore---its what you do. And when you are the host of a website on mystics, you study mystics---its what you do! (To understand this bit of humor hopefully you have seen the Dora the Explorer commercial with her at the South pole--its absolutely a classic!). And along with meeting with Charlie I have spoken with him on the phone, and corresponded with him via email on quite a few occasions. Additionally, I have spoken to, and corresponded with, one of his priest spiritual directors--all with a spirit of openness and dialogue in an effort to understand his purported prophetic mission and message.

In short, I remain "neutral" in what concerns Charlie and I have been keeping an open mind towards his purported prophetic mission. As I have stated in the article above, time will soon tell as to whether Charlie's prophetic mission is authentic, or not, so there is really no need for me (or anyone else for that matter) to come to any hasty conclusions at this juncture. Yes, time will soon tell! Personally, I will say that I find Charlie to be sincere, but this does not mean that he may be sincerely mistaken in his interpretations. I have prayed often that God's will may be done in and through him--and I wish this for all people. I respect those who are favorable towards Charlie, while at the same time I also respect those who, out of prudence or caution, discount his message. The only persons I would not admire would be those who judge quickly or superficially, without giving the person and message involved a just consideration and hearing.

Thanks again for your sincere comments and may God bless you and your loved ones,Glenn Dallaire

I was sent by a friend of mine the link to this blog entry this evening. I've never heard before about Charlie Johnston, so I was not not familiar with him; however I am familiar with what he says, for he is not the only individual in our times —prophet or non prophet— who claims that we are in the very midst of a "storm", "crisis" or "end times."I have also read most of the comments on this blog entry, and I perceived a special interest from many to discern whether he is a real prophet or just a fake one; some comments even rebuke the writer of this post for having spread word about a "not ecclesiastically approved" visionary.I believe we shouldn't lose perspective on things as crucial as this. Do not focus on the one single tree, lest you miss the magnificence of the forest. What I mean to say is that, whether Charlie Johnston is for real a true prophet or not is not the most important task on this matter; we should give up on trying to determine that on our own; but what we should not miss —by any means— is the fact that we have a wide variety of messages pointing out to the exact same warning. So, trying to earnestly prove this one right or wrong is deceiving. In my opinion, as a Catholic Theologian, in this particular matter applies the wise principle taught by Blessed John Henry Newman: the convergence of probabilities. Newman explained that we become certain of things not through a discursive analysis of all the logical arguments which may be made for and against (for logic, which is so useful with respect to abstractions, offers very little when it comes to facts), but rather through a growing awareness —either over considerable time or in just a few moments— that there is such a convergence of probabilities in favor of the thing under consideration that it must be true. From this convergence of probabilities arises certitude.My point is that we do have a great convergence of probabilities showing us that we are in the midst of a "storm", "world crisis", "end times" —you name it— Fatima is on the exact same token; as well as Garabandal, Lasalette, and a very long etcetera. If someone do not believe in any on these messages that's fine; but nobody can disbelief in what we read on the news about that is going on, confirming the truth behind all these messages. So, at this instance, what matters is not determining whether Charlie Johnston is for real or not, but assenting that this sort of warning is for real, for it comes from a wide variety of sources, all of them pointing out the exact same fact: we are in the midst of this crucial time of history where the final battle between good and evil is taking place. So, do not get lost in the particularity of any of those messages and acknowledge the fact that they all throw true arguments for us to better be ready for what is yet to come.So, we can —and should— have already found certitude about this. I think by now neither one of us should be wondering whether or not these events will unfold —though they might accurately unfold in the foretold fashion or with some variations, that doesn't affect the validity of its warning—. My goodness, we just need eyes to see, for those events are already unfolding before us all.

I agree I think you are talking out of both sides of your mouth Glenn. You become too defensive when someone disagrees. This individual's current "pilgrimage" reports are more like grandpa sending travel diary notes than someone anxious to spread the news from Our Lord and His Love. The accounts are so banal talking about the food he had to eat and the sights he saw and the people he met. I don't think Jesus sweet name has been mentioned in any yet. So different to the accounts from other approved visionaries or even someone like Mother Teresa or St Therese's account of her travels before entering Carmel. The most telling feature is that there's practically everything about Charlie in them and next to nothing about Jesus. It should be the other way around! I worry for you Glenn, you seem to set too much store by these types of people. Why do you need to know the plan? There is a saying "When men make plans God laughs." We can't know God's plans for sure the only thing we can know for sure is that God will be there no matter what happens. Perhaps God is challenging you to trust Him more.

Thanks Padraig for your kind comment---As for myself, I think that Charlie is the brave one, having walked across the country at age 55 and now travelling around the country speaking and courageously witnessing to the prophetic message he feels that he has been given. To me, both of these take a great deal of courage.And thank you Padraig for your witness to Jesus and especially to our Blessed Mother in the Mother of God Forum and elsewhere.

For those wanting a more reasoned and balanced consideration of alleged "mystic" Charlie and others of his ilk I strongly recommend the following text Author Foster, Gwendolyn Audrey.Title Hoarders, Doomsday preppers, and the culture of apocalypse / Gwendolyn Audrey Foster, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, USA.Imprint New York, NY : Palgrave Macmillan, 2014.SummaryThe culture of twenty-first century America revolves around narcissistic death, violence, and visions of doom. Foster explores this culture of the apocalypse, from hoarding and gluttony to visions of the post-apocalyptic world.

Gwendolyn Foster is a radical feminist who makes Barack Obama look like a pious, conservative Christian. She skirts around the edges of advocating internment of Christians. She blames the Connecticut school shooting a few years back on Christian "hoarders." This is not what any reasonable person would call "more reasoned and balanced," particularly since Charlie frequently warns AGAINST hoarding and doomsday prepping.

Jesus Himself promoted the rights of women, it is a positive thing. This quote from Charlie's website belies your response. He appears to to work very much on a mentality of warning of doom, preparing for it and even that we may need to use violence. "This is fairly obvious, too. But it does NOT just refer to “spiritual warfare.” We in the west have lived in a coccoon of safety for several hundred years now. It has reduced our thinking on temporal battle and strife to mere formulaic platitudes. But the violence you read about with horror is coming to your door soon enough – and formulaic platitudes are not a defense. The Scripture that “…he who lives by the sword will die by the sword…” is often quoted to urge unrelenting pacifism. But it is tyrants and oppressors, those who rely on force to compel their will, who live by the sword. To defend, even with violent force, those who are violently assaulted, is not living by the sword. And now both you and nations have a great and terrible responsibility. If you attack with violence when diplomacy would have resolved the strife, you will be held to account. If you allow people to be violated when you could have stopped it with vigorous force, you will be held to account. Sounds impossible. It is. So you better trust God, do your duty, and abandon pious-sounding formulas."

So long as you understand that coming here and saying that a radical feminist who believes in gay marriage, abortion rights and that Christians are the greatest threat to the world other than climate change hates Charlie will not exactly discredit him here, go ahead and quote her.

I quoted Charlie Johnston, not Professor Foster. I can find no statements from her saying she hates Charlie, disagreeing with someone doesn't mean you hate them. Jesus disagreed with the pharisees but he didn't hate them. Where does she state she believes Christians are the second greatest treat to the world? My point was that people need to have a broad, reasoned approach to this man's claims and consider other points of view. I suggest you read some classic texts on Christian mysticism in general and the psychology of Christian mysticism which helps separate the frauds from the genuine. he Church itself uses this valuable information when examining individuals like Charlie's claims. I notice Charlie recently re-posted an interesting blurb basically saying don't disbelieve if an alleged seer doesn't exhibit the behaviors and beliefs and accurate predictions commonly associated with genuine visionaries. This seems to promote disobedience and disregard for the Church's own processes for determining these things. Trust me even if I am not displaying those things the Church has determined over centuries to be a reliable yardstick and safeguard for deciding if someone is a genuine seer. I find that very disturbing talk indeed and extremely disobedient.

Interesting, I just heard part of an interview with this man. He gave a talk yesterday at St. Mary of the Assumption Cathedral in San Francisco (on the feast of the Assumption no less). He was being interviewed on the Archdiocese of San Francisco Radio. I am always a bit wary of anyone claiming to have visions of Jesus, Mary, or Angels. That being St. Francis and Clare had deep mystical experiences. Maybe there is truth to it. Who knows?

Sad that the Charlie Johnston virus has infected Mystics of the Church and Mother of God forum. Glenn says he's neutral and then in the next paragraphs defends Charlie's trips and speeches. Please watch Going Clear Scientology and the Prison of Belief...it will make you wonder what shackles of someone else's fantasies you have adopted for your own. Could you imagine Sister Lucia sitting at a P.C. defending herself against doubters?

-Firstly, as to myself being neutral in regards to my public position concerning Charlie Johnston, since I have replied to this a few times before, I will not bother to reiterate what I have already stated.

-Secondly, the glaring problem with your criticism is that you offer nothing of any factual substance, but simply the names of a couple of videos--which have nothing to do with Charlie Johnston--which apparently helped you to come to your own opinion. The thing is with opinions is that just about everyone has one, yet they carry no weight or importance in what really matters. I can tell you that there is currently quite a bit of interest in Mr. Johnston, which is reflected in the daily visitor statistics for the article above, and if every person that dropped by left a message stating their own opinion, well it would mean nothing, and would not do anyone any good!

What does matter is the Churches official position concerning Charlie Johnston, and thus far the Church has withheld judgement, preferring to wait upon events I would assume. So at this point, lacking any official judgement from the Church, what matters is objective facts and/or criticisms, and not subjective opinions like what you present.

So, with this in mind, instead of providing ones own opinion which has no importance or bearing, a *helpful* criticism would present actual facts in relation to Church teachings, which could help others discern. An example of this would be:

-I believe Mr Charlie Johnston is NOT authentic because he stated/did _______________ which is contrary to the doctrines and teachings of the Church.

If you can give such an example I believe that it would be very constructive criticism. Otherwise, I suggest we not fill up this comment section with a slew of everyone's own opinions.

The minute you see self-proclaimed visionaries giving interviews to the press, dashing off reams of prophecies for all and sundry, asserting that they’ve seen Mary and that they have an urgent message that can save the world; the minute you see someone even permitting himself to be interviewed on such a matter; certainly as soon as you see a reported visionary routinely blessing people, "curing" pilgrims, or even receiving pilgrims at all—you can safely assume that the person is a fraud or, if you want to be particularly charitable, that the person is deluded, genuinely believing that what he said he saw was real. Either way, it’s not worthy of your attention.

Here, as in so much else, John of the Cross is the best model. When dispatched to investigate a reported apparition, he walked cheerfully up to the woman and said, "Are you the lady to whom the Holy Spirit is appearing?" When she answered "Yes!," he bid her good day and reported to the bishop that the woman was either a fraud or delusional. Credit-worthy visionaries speak of "the Lady" or "the person," but they don’t even claim that it was Mary or Christ.

- Kevin Johnson, "The Ten Most Common Misconceptions About Apparitions"

Hi Anonymous,Thanks for the quotes from Kevin Orlin Johnson's article "The Ten Most Common Misconceptions About Apparitions."

There are two very major problems with Mr. Kevin Johnson's assertions:FIRST PARAGRAPH OF THE QUOTE:1) If his statements in the first paragraph of the quote are in fact true, then we will now need to completely remove St Paul and ALL of his letters from the New Testament. After all, Paul claims to have seen Jesus in a vision on his way to Damascus, and then he spent the rest of his life travelling about much of the known world proclaiming this very Jesus by Name, that he, Paul, says he saw in a vision, and because of this went about saying to everyone that he had an urgent message that can save the world.

-Thus I think Mr. Kevin Johnson will obviously need to rethink this statement.

SECOND PARAGRAPH OF THE QUOTE2) While St. John of the Cross is a towering figure when it comes to the discernment of Mystics, if the Church applied this one anecdote of his as the sole or even predominant deciding factor to discernment, then once again it would have to remove St Paul's Letters from the New Testament, because once again St Paul claims to have seen Jesus in a vision on his way to Damascus, and then he spent the rest of his life travelling about much of the known world proclaiming this very Jesus *by Name*, saying to EVERYONE that would listen that he himself saw Jesus in a vision. Nevertheless there is a whole lot more to the teachings of St John of the Cross on discernment of mystics than this one short story, while educational, is simply just one of large number of factors that the Church uses in discernment. The greatest "litmus test" that the Church uses in these cases is actually humility, and then next is obedience to rightful authority.

And so, I think I have shown that the first paragraph which contains all of Mr. Kevin Johnson's own assertions is not only completely faulty, but bears only the weight of Mr. Kevin Johnson himself.

The 2nd paragraph while potentially helpful when combined with many other considerations on discernment, bears only the weight of a small part of ONE Saints own thoughts on discernment, and by far this one anecdote is only the tip of St John of the Cross writings on this matter. Nevertheless if taken by itself, as I have pointed out this little anecdote too would completely discredit St Paul and his vision on the way to Damascus, and his mission afterwards of his witness and spreading the Gospel and the holy Name of Jesus to many lands. Lets imagine for a moment that using St John of the Cross example, he would have us walk up to St Paul and say "Are you the man who says that Jesus appeared to on the way to Damascus?"

And how do we think St Paul would answer? "No, it was not Jesus but a man in a white robe"?!?!?!

-Well, this writer thinks it is quite obvious that Paul would say very boldly that it was Jesus whom he saw. In fact he says so a number of times in his letters.

Thanks again for your comments and may God bless you and your loved ones,Glenn Dallaire

Hi Glenn. My emphasis was actually on the first part of what Kevin Johnson wrote.

The minute you see self-proclaimed visionaries giving interviews to the press...the minute you see someone even permitting himself to be interviewed on such a matter; you can safely assume that the person is a fraud or, if you want to be particularly charitable, that the person is deluded, genuinely believing that what he said he saw was real. Either way, it’s not worthy of your attention.

My personal opinion is Charlie Johnston is a well-meaning fraud.

People are flocking to him and placing what he says above the Church. On the MOG forum, someone listed Charlie Johnston BEFORE the Pope and the bishops about who they trusted about the times we're in.

Abp. Peter Sartain of Seattle addressed this issue when he was still bishop in Joliet, IL:

Dear Brother Priests,

From time to time we are approached by parishioners who would like to invite speakers representing various alleged apparitions of the Blessed Virgin, private revelations or locutions, or others claiming to possess extraordinary spiritual gifts. My purpose in bringing this to your attention is to ask that you not issue such invitations. Whether the speakers would make presentations on we1l-known a1leged apparitions, such as Medjugorje, or lesser known private revelations, we must be extremely cautious about inviting or promoting them.

As you know the Church takes great time and care before declaring that an apparition is worthy of belief, and even then it never says that a Catholic must accept the apparition as a matter of faith. We must avoid giving the impression that alleged apparitions about which the Church has not made a judgment are somehow already approved. It is our responsibility to see that our parishioners are not led down the wrong path. That is not to say that those who ask us to promote these matters are doing so out of bad faith, but we must be extremely careful not to confuse our parishioners. Our greatest spiritual treasures are the Word of God, the Sacraments, especially the Eucharist, and the teaching of the Church, and our focus should always be there. Needless to say, these comments do not refer to apparitions such as Fatima, Lourdes or Guadalupe which enjoy the approval of the Church.

Thank you for your attention to this important spiritual matter, and I am grateful for your cooperation.

This cautionary advisement has actually been advised by Charlie himself several times. He has said quote " I do not want to put the clergy into the midst of a controversy over me. They have enough to worry about – and I would rather support them in their efforts to clearly proclaim the faith with fidelity. If they get caught up in a controversy over me, they can easily get distracted from what is important, which is to proclaim the faith ". Some clergy have still done so on their own at reviewing evidence (as I have also) that he has not ever stated anything contrary to the Faith. The only items in question are to the authenticity of his visitations and frankly, I find plausible but nevertheless will be revealed in there own time or not soon. Our modern day of communications allows for giving interviews and thus many mystics have thus used this source to disseminate important messages to the faithful after being led to by authoritative spiritual direction. I strongly agree with Glenn on his point of St. Paul which you have seemed to ignore on its face evidence. I appreciate being the devils advocate for caution of the faithful to fall into error but the use of concrete examples and evidence may strengthen your case otherwise "Do not quench the Spirit; 20 do not despise prophetic [a]utterances. 21 But examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good; 22 abstain from every [b]form of evil." God Bless and strengthen you in your discernment.

I believe Charlia Johnston is not authentic because he stated "Had we left it to government, they would be droning on about workplace violence and such while telling us that Islam is a religion of peace." And this is in defiance of and contrary to the statements of the past two and current popes of the Church and Vatican documents which/who wisely advised us to differentiate between fundamentalist and non fundamentalist Islam.

Second Vatican Council, Nostra Aetate 3, October 28, 1965“The Catholic Church rejects nothing of what is true and holy in these religions. She has a high regard for the manner of life and conduct, the precepts and doctrines which, although differing in many ways from her own teaching, nevertheless often reflect a ray of that truth which enlightens all men. Yet she proclaims and is in duty bound to proclaim without fail, Christ who is ‘the way, the truth and the life’ (Jn 1:6). In him, in whom God reconciled all things to himself (cf. 2Co 5:18-19), men find the fullness of their religious life.

“The Church, therefore, urges her sons to enter with prudence and charity into discussion and collaboration with members of other religions. Let Christians, while witnessing to their own faith and way of life, acknowledge, preserve and encourage the spiritual and moral truths found among non-Christians, also their social life and culture.

“The Church has also a high regard for the Muslims. They worship God, who is one, living and subsistent, merciful and almighty, the Creator of heaven and earth (Cf. St. Gregory VII, Letter III, 21 to Anazir [Al-Nasir], King of Mauretania PL, 148.451A.), who has spoken to men. They strive to submit themselves without reserve to the hidden decrees of God, just as Abraham submitted himself to God’s plan, to whose faith Muslims eagerly link their own. Although not acknowledging him as God, they venerate Jesus as a prophet, his Virgin Mother they also honor, and even at times devoutly invoke. Further, they await the day of judgment and the reward of God following the resurrection of the dead. For this reason they highly esteem an upright life and worship God, especially by way of prayer, alms-deeds and fasting.

“Over the centuries many quarrels and dissensions have arisen between Christians and Muslims. The sacred Council now pleads with all to forget the past, and urges that a sincere effort be made to achieve mutual understanding; for the benefit of all men, let them together preserve and promote peace, liberty, social justice and moral values.”

“Therefore, the Church reproves, as foreign to the mind of Christ, any discrimination against people or any harassment of them on the basis of their race, color, condition in life or religion. Accordingly, following the footsteps of the holy Apostles Peter and Paul, the sacred Council earnestly begs the Christian faithful to ‘conduct themselves well among the Gentiles’ (1P 2:12) and if possible, as far as depends on them, to be at peace with all men (cf. Rm 12:18), and in that way to be true sons of the Father who is in heaven (cf. Mt 5:45).”

You believe that Charlie is not authentic because you perceive that he does not "differentiate between fundamentalist and non fundamentalist Islam."

Of course it is not for me to speak for Charlie, however I can post below a few of his comments concerning Islam, which I think describe his position vis a vis Islam, especially the radical elements, quite well:

-------"....I know that not all Muslim states participate in every Islamic atrocity. But I have yet to hear such a state condemn such things in unambiguous terms. Idiot pseudo-intellectuals pretend that Muslims only act as they do because of American offenses. Well, folks, America had not yet emerged as the dominant power 100 years ago when Islam launched the Armenian Genocide. They are quite capable of atrocity when we mind our own business – and when we were too insignificant to be a factor in their calculations.In most Muslim lands it is a criminal offense (sometimes punishable by death) to have a Bible in your possession. Islam teaches that once any territory has been under Islamic control, it must always be under Islamic control and that war can – and should be – raised to eject any infidels that occupy it. The feeble objections occasionally raised by some Muslims to Islamic atrocities are not a moral expression of people of God: they are the moral equivalent of a street gang defense. They will not unambiguously condemn the atrocity and its perpetrators; rather, like a street gang, they simply say it was “not them” – at least this time.(Musings – Cardinal O’Malley’s Comments: The Rest of the Story Posted on November 17, 2014)------

"...But not to be deceived, in the end Russia and America will be the two most steadfast allies in helping the world to endure against the assault from the primary instrument of the antichrist, which is from China – not Islam. Islam will be a scourge until we take it seriously, then the great shock will be how quickly it folds in on itself. (Our Lady of Tepeyac (Guadalupe), who personally converted the Aztecs miraculously, will do something similar with Islam – working primarily through the women of Islam. But that will NOT happen until we take the threat of Islam seriously and fight it.) While we are celebrating the victory over Islam, the real threat will rise into view, like an enraged Mama Bear over her fallen cub. And then we will know what desperate battle is, for China, the land of the dragon, is truly the dragon’s agent on earth." (charliej373, July 27, 2014 at 10:55 pm)-----(continued below)

...."Back in the late 90’s I spoke to a group of students at a large Midwestern university about the role of faith in the development of Western Civilization and its intersection with public policy in modern times. As often happens, one student got up and asked if faith was so good, how could I explain the Crusades. I can deal with ignorance, but I loathe ignorance with attitude, particular in a center of learning, so this hit one of my hot buttons.“I would no more apologize for the Crusades than I would for defeating Hitler,” I shot back. “I know most of you think the Crusades were Christianity’s attack on peaceful Islam. The Crusades were, in fact, Christianity’s counter-attack against Muslim genocidal aggression that sought to conquer the whole world and destroy Christianity entirely. My main problem is that Christianity got started so late. By the time we roused ourselves to battle at all, Islam had conquered all of the Iberian Peninsula (Spain and Portugal) and huge chunks of Western Europe, including parts of France, Germany and Italy. The defensive success of the Crusades made it possible for you to be at this university today.”The students were stunned. The head of the philosophy department, who was also a prominent medieval historian and well-regarded by the students, was there. They appealed to him to correct my errors. He rose and said that though I gave a very short version, what I said was accurate. They were even more stunned. Musings – Crusades, Marriage, Round-Up Posted on October 4, 2014 by charliej373---------

"....…Islam must be confronted and defeated. The surprise there will be how quickly it falls once it is taken seriously and confronted. Helping will be Our Lady of Tepeyac, the Mother of Conversion. There will be a mass conversion in Islam, largely driven by its women, that will eclipse the conversion of the Aztec Indians when she first came. But it will not begin to happen until we take it seriously and confront it directly.Be Not Afraid: God Has a PlanPosted on October 17, 2014 by charliej373----------

Now, the question is, do these perspectives on Islam and on radical Islam in particular contradict Catholic teaching? In other words, can a faithful Catholic espouse and hold such beliefs? I will have to leave it to theologians to comment on this one.

Thanks very much for your comments Glenn which confirm my opinion and support my statement that I believe Charlie Johnston is not authentic. The statements he made which you quoted: " Islam will be a scourge until we take it seriously," and "Islam must be confronted and defeated. The surprise there will be how quickly it falls once it is taken seriously and confronted." are contrary to the Church teachings I quoted:" “The Church, therefore, urges her sons to enter with prudence and charity into discussion and collaboration with members of other religions. Let Christians, while witnessing to their own faith and way of life, acknowledge, preserve and encourage the spiritual and moral truths found among non-Christians, also their social life and culture.," and also "“Therefore, the Church reproves, as foreign to the mind of Christ, any discrimination against people or any harassment of them on the basis of their race, color, condition in life or religion. Accordingly, following the footsteps of the holy Apostles Peter and Paul, the sacred Council earnestly begs the Christian faithful to ‘conduct themselves well among the Gentiles’ (1P 2:12) and if possible, as far as depends on them, to be at peace with all men (cf. Rm 12:18), and in that way to be true sons of the Father who is in heaven (cf. Mt 5:45).”I think the theologians have already spoken. A faithful, authentic Catholic cannot and would not regard another religion as a "scourge" and spread via the internet and through public speeches this notion which the Church has declared to be one foreign to the mind of Christ. To do so is essentially vilification.

I would like to remember your readers that 2017 is the 100 (CENTENARY) of... FÁTIMA!! - The event that will change RUSSIA is the Consecration of RUSSIA to Mary's Immaculate Heart. It hasn't been done PROPERLY yet, asked in Fátima almost 100 years ago.

I've been reading and studying both old and modern Catholic Prophecy for more than 20 years by now, and these messages are in accordance with them in general. The only thing is that Charlie is giving some tips on the unfolding of the distinct acts of the drama. In this it is very similar to these Locutions that I trust 100% BECAUSE EVERYTHING stated there has... come to pass (except of course the death of a Pope in Jerusalem, the Conversion of Israel and the Consecration of RUSSIA see for yourselves and ask God to illuminate you.www.locutions.org

Also I strongly advise you to see the entire interview of this Polish priest that has been given some lights on the Warning and the Great Tribulation, 'storm', etc.I was impressed with the benediction and Litany he reparts in the end of the Video!This interview has the suggestive title; "I've seen the 'New World'"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jp5y_cheN4U

A bunch of Catholic theologians and saints have called Islam a heresy. Hillaire Belloc called it the greatest of the Christian heresies. St. John Newman regularly called Mohammed a false prophet. All that anonymous above has cited is the Vatican saying we should respect what is good in any religion. If he is going to dismiss Charlie as a fraud because of Charlie's unflattering view of Islam, he will also have to dismiss a bunch of canonized saints. I heard Charlie speak a week ago. He said that most Muslims try to reach out to God in the only way they have been taught and we must reach out to and respect them, but that Islam is a disordered system at its heart.

Thanks also Anonymous directly above for also providing evidence of Charlie Johnston's disobedience to Church teaching and hence inauthenticity. Saying another religion is "disorder" is certainly not following the Vatican's charge that we be charitable and act in accordance with the mind of Christ. What you claim Charlie said contradicts what is in black and white in his disturbingly unchristian and u catholic writings. There are and have been several shonky theologians who also disobey the Church's decrees. Hilliard Belloc was also an antisemite. Consider this: "his 1922 book, The Jews, Belloc argued that "the continued presence of the Jewish nation intermixed with other nations alien to it presents a permanent problem of the gravest character," and that the "Catholic Church is the conservator of an age-long European tradition, and that tradition will never compromise with the fiction that a Jew can be other than a Jew. Wherever the Catholic Church has power, and in proportion to its power, the Jewish problem will be recognized to the full."[28] The Jews was largely perceived as an anti-semitic work." Yet our beautiful saviour was a Jew! It is not surprising he had equally disturbing views contrary to the Church's opinion and the mind of Christ about Islam. A common misconception about saints and sanctity is that it equates with perfection. Saints are set apart for God, products of their times but most importantly are open to correction. Numerous saints were charitable to Muslims such St Francis, Charlie Johnston is not open to correction, writes things in opposition to Church teaching. As written in the catechism: "841 The Church's relationship with the Muslims. "The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims

I do not think Charlie Johnston is an authentic prophet because he said that Christmas 2013 would be the last normal Christmas. Douay-Rheims bible Deuteronomy 18:22 Thou shalt have this sign: Whatsoever that same prophet foretells in the name of the Lord, and it cometh not to pass: that thing the Lord hath not spoken, but the prophet hath forged it by the pride of his mind: and therefore thou shalt not fear him Charlie Johnston has now said that Obama would not finish his term as president and that he would convert. Charlie Johnston is too worldly to be a true mystic. True mystics are detached from the world and the news.

Susan Brinkmann of the Women of Grace site offered some of the most sensible advice I've seen yet about Charlie and his prophecies (very recent too, from August 24):

The Church has made no pronouncements on Charlie Johnston or his prophecies. Even though he has been receiving spiritual direction for years, neither his bishops nor the clergy familiar with his prophecies have publicly acknowledged these messages.

While we are not obligated to believe in private revelation, and because the Church has not yet made a pronouncement about their veracity, we should use great caution in accepting and/or rejecting these messages. In cases like this, always heed the advice given to us in the Bible: “Do not quench the Spirit. Do not despise prophecies, but test everything; hold fast what is good” (1 Thessalonians 5:19-21).

What is good in these messages is that they contain essentially the same warnings that were given by Our Lord and Our Lady in other approved apparitions – repent or suffer the consequences. The only difference is that Johnston has put a timetable on it and has given specifics about what kind of consequences we can expect to suffer in the days ahead.

It’s also a good idea to heed the advice of spiritual directors, such as the late great Father Benedict Groeschel, who say even the greatest saints got it wrong when it came to messages from heaven.

In other words, even if Johnston is legit, he’s likely getting at least some of it wrong, so don’t make any decisions based on his prophecies without first discussing this with a spiritual director or confessor.

This comment is to correct a few misleading ideas posted on some 'Anonymous' comments above:

1) "Saying another religion is "disorder" is certainly not following the Vatican's charge that we be charitable and act in accordance with the mind of Christ."The Catholic Church catechism teaches that correcting the sinners and wrong doings is one of the Seven Spiritual Works of Charity. Jesus DID correct sinners. True Charity CONDEMNS SIN but not the sinner. Jesus even coined the term 'Synagogue of Satan' referring to the unrepentant Jews that refused Him as the true Savior (this is on John's Book of Revelation, letters to the seven churches); in the same book of the New Testament, Jesus condemns the 'Nicolaites'[a Religion]. Was Jesus uncharitable when he expelled the money changers from the Temple? - or the famous imprecations after the Beatitudes Sermon "Woe to you....!"Was the Pope wrong when he commanded Christian Europe to fight the Ottoman Turks in what became the Lepanto Battle?Well, here is the testimony of a Priest under ISIS controlled territory: http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2015/08/theres-no-such-thing-as-moderate-islam.html

2) The idea that summoning someone or something is 'not Christian' because it offends Charity is a typical slide of what I call the 'Church of Nice'. Folks, humanly speaking, Jesus was nailed to the Cross because the Jewish Authorities decided to silence a fearsome 'critical' voice and couldn't find another 'solution' because of the portentous miracles Christ performed bringing indisputable authority to His preaching. If this 'moral hermeneutics' prevaisl, telling one's children that stealing candies from a buddy is not right and is a sin goes against the virtue of Charity and thus Christ would never do it! ... Absurdities like this can be seen all around us nowadays.

1- the teaching of the Church is not restricted to the XX Century... if someone's wants to study the teaching of the Church on Islam, it must not be restricted to the 'last two Popes'. You have at least 1400 years of Church Magisterium to dig through2- I would like to remind the still alive Pope benedcit (in)famous adrees at Regensbourg University on Islam:-'light' Wikipedia source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regensburg_lecture- more serious analysis of that speech: http://pontificateofpopebenedictxvi.blogspot.com.br/2008/08/regensburg-address-faith-reason-and.html

This post is to correct the erroneous ideas presented by Bizlep above. As stated by the Vatican and I quote again: "The Catholic Church rejects nothing of what is true and holy in these religions. She has a high regard for the manner of life and conduct, the precepts and doctrines which, although differing in many ways from her own teaching, nevertheless often reflect a ray of that truth which enlightens all men. Yet she proclaims and is in duty bound to proclaim without fail, Christ who is ‘the way, the truth and the life’ (Jn 1:6). In him, in whom God reconciled all things to himself (cf. 2Co 5:18-19), men find the fullness of their religious life.

“The Church, therefore, urges her sons to enter with prudence and charity into discussion and collaboration with members of other religions. Let Christians, while witnessing to their own faith and way of life, acknowledge, preserve and encourage the spiritual and moral truths found among non-Christians, also their social life and culture.

“The Church has also a high regard for the Muslims. They worship God, who is one, living and subsistent, merciful and almighty, the Creator of heaven and earth (Cf. St. Gregory VII, Letter III, 21 to Anazir [Al-Nasir], King of Mauretania PL, 148.451A.), who has spoken to men. They strive to submit themselves without reserve to the hidden decrees of God, just as Abraham submitted himself to God’s plan, to whose faith Muslims eagerly link their own. Although not acknowledging him as God, they venerate Jesus as a prophet, his Virgin Mother they also honor, and even at times devoutly invoke. Further, they await the day of judgment and the reward of God following the resurrection of the dead. For this reason they highly esteem an upright life and worship God, especially by way of prayer, alms-deeds and fasting.

“Over the centuries many quarrels and dissensions have arisen between Christians and Muslims. The sacred Council now pleads with all to forget the past, and urges that a sincere effort be made to achieve mutual understanding; for the benefit of all men, let them together preserve and promote peace, liberty, social justice and moral values.”

“Therefore, the Church reproves, as foreign to the mind of Christ, any discrimination against people or any harassment of them on the basis of their race, color, condition in life or religion. Accordingly, following the footsteps of the holy Apostles Peter and Paul, the sacred Council earnestly begs the Christian faithful to ‘conduct themselves well among the Gentiles’ (1P 2:12) and if possible, as far as depends on them, to be at peace with all men (cf. Rm 12:18), and in that way to be true sons of the Father who is in heaven (cf. Mt 5:45).”Clearly the Church is not requiring us to correct Muslims as sinners, by declaring their religion is "disorder" but by showing respect and entering into mature, productive dialogue with them. Clearly the Church requires us to be charitable to Muslims. Clearly the Church does not regard being charitable to Muslims as being "Church of Nice Folks'" but acting as the loving Church Christ wishes us to be. Clearly the Church requires us to forget past difficulties and move forward towards peace and "put away our sword." (Christ to Peter). Clearly our current pope requires us to respect and be charitable to Muslims. To not do so is disobedient and arrogant. It is concerning that anyone question the above statements of the Church and publicly promulgate concepts that are opposite. Charlie Johnston writes disrespectfully and uncharitably about Muslims and in a manner contrary to the Church's teachings quoted above. For this and several other reasons I believe he is inauthentic.

In regards to Charlie's position on Islam, I think he has been careful to note that most Muslims are trying to worship God in the only way they know, and that, like St. Paul before the pagans, we should both congratulate those of sincerity and good will on their piety while introducing them to the true God (with Our Lady's help). Also, I think that he has made it clear that he believes that the system of Islam itself is a deception, and that most Muslims are its victims, but also that some are its perpetrators. For sure, one need not share his specific perceptions in regards to Islam.

I personally have no problem with anyone dismissing Charlie Johnston, but I would only hope that one would do so for a valid reason after a sincere and just discernment, and not just a "knee jerk" reaction to his message of an upcoming Storm for humanity, which of course is not a very pleasant contemplation, hence the tendency of a quick dismissal for some in regards to Charlie.

Like many others, since late last year I have been watching Charlie quite closely, and as I have stated previously that time will soon tell whether his prophetic message is authentic, or not. In the meantime while I personally have a couple of "concerns" in regards to Charlie, thus far the sum total does not add up to anything serious. In fact, I believe that Charlie shows quite a few signs of authenticity. For sure his sincerity is readily apparent, and also the fact that he has put himself and his reputation "out there" for all to discern. One has to give him credit for this.

Also, I have personally spoken with one of his priest spiritual directors on a number of occasions and he has confirmed for me that Charlie has been very consistent over the years in his statements and his prophetic message. Also, to be very frank, I have found his 1-1/2 year 3200 mile trek across the country to be impressive, given his age and especially his neurological condition with its accompanying painful nerve damage, along with the fact that he was able to drink untreated and unfiltered water throughout his entire pilgrimage. Another positive sign is that he does not sell anything (books, DVD's etc...) on his website, or during his speaking "visits". In other words, he is definitely a prophet that is NOT for profit. One can see that he puts his heart and soul into his "mission" and I personally greatly respect him for this. Again, time will soon tell whether is prophetic mission is authentic, or not. In the meantime I think that his core message of "Acknowledge God, Take the Next Right Step, and Be a Sign of Hope To Those Around You" is very worthy of consideration and implementation. -Just my .02 cents, for whatever it is worth.

1) Still no direction on how to handle him and his message from the Archdiocese of Denver. That's been my biggest concern all along. It was way back in January - here we are in September, and silence. If this was really serious and urgent, I honestly believe they would have taken some action in regards to these messages (imo).

2) He lacks humility. A glaring example of this is found in this column from August 25:

Now, some secular commentators and religious analysts have caught up somewhat with what I was saying from the beginning. They see that our cultural, social and justice systems are entering into crucifixion.

But they have not fully caught up with what I have been saying from the beginning, for while they usually only see crucifixion, I have seen and described resurrection from the beginning. Perhaps they will catch up with me on that soon enough, too. But I am convinced that that is largely why I have such a booming audience these days.

Those are not the words of someone who is humble.

3) Stubbornly insisting that his failed prophecies weren't, e. g. Christmas 2013 will be the last normal Christmas.

4) He recently insisted that his message isn't dark and scary and seems to dismiss people who think it is. To be fair, the Trust Love Do part of his message is not. But the China/Russia/economic and governmental collapses are. he reposted all of that on August 28.

5) People aren't being sensible about this at all. People aren't following the sensible advice of, for example, Susan Brinkmann. She was saying, he's not approved yet, go consult with a spiritual director before making any decisions about these messages. And what do people do? CHARLIE has become their de facto spiritual director, they hang on to every word he says, and they don't question any of it. What if he got some of this wrong, as Fr. Groeschel said that even St. Joan of Arc did? He has people all anxious about September, which is here, and October. What if nothing happens?

6) I can name some recent example of visionaries with messages like his that have fixed dates, either never approved by the Church or rejected: Father Gobbi, whose 2000 Immaculate Heart triumph prophecy never panned out; Gianna Talone Sullivan, who was shut down by the Archdiocese of Baltimore in the early 2000s, but was still contuning to issue dire prophecies - very similar to Charlie's - as late as 2008 and even this year.

None of this means I don't believe he's sincere. I think he may either be deluded by something or have a too-powerful imagination. I don't know. But I've looked at more than a few of his writings and said, something isn't right here.

Let me point out a [painfull?] reality of out Mother Church. In the last century (XX) and present one there are probably THOUSANDS of supposed private messages or Catholic Prophecy and unfortunately most of them are still waiting for the Church to pronounce about it. I'm sincerely afraid that Her definitive judgement might not come before what was prophetized. I'll give you two big examples: Garabandal & Medugorje. In many cases, the Church awaits the end of the phenomenon or the death of the protagonists.As for an Episcopal 'clearing' of a given phenomenon, it can change when the local Bishop changes, juts like the history of Medugorje, with distinctive Bishops having distinct says on the matter. That said, of course it is more comforting to have some kind of magisterial clearing. Anyway, when I see common or similar content in independent supernatural or worldly sources, I tend to keep an eye open. So, just to give you an example, here are some supposed Locutions from the Immaculate Heart of Mary to the World (that is why they are quite distinct from 'typical' Catholic private messages...these messages are destined to any citizen or slave in this World, not only Christians and even less Catholics)and much of the content is identical to Charlie's. In one of them (just use the blog search facility), the Mother of God calls Muhammad a False Prophet, which is actually what he was... ANY PROPHET THAT CAME AFTER JESUS to implant a distinct religion is a false prophet BY DEFINITION. www.locutions .org

I would just like to clarify that Charlie has not written anything about the a crash beginning in September or October. Several folks on the internet have falsely attributed this to him but such is not the case. He did say that this fall is "ripe for a crash" and he also wrote for example: "But after the summer comes fall...and great will be the fall"

And again he also wrote: "Finally, something that worries me a lot. Many of you are asking me such things as when you should pull your kids out of school and hunker down. I know many people – and credible voices – are focusing on September as a time of crash. I have not publicly said that. I do not know when the final crash comes: only when the Rescue comes and all the things that must come between now and then. That does not mean that crash will not come in September. I do know it will come soon."

Even while his statements do seemingly allude to this upcoming Fall as being the start of the crash/Storm, he has also stated in the comments section of his blog that such was only his personal assessment, and was not any indication that he received from heaven.

I point this out simply because I think it is very important to be clear concerning the facts.

Dear AnonymousI wont go into discussions here...we have a situation where I talk of potatoes and the other mention tomatoes. Could you please tell me which assertions in my post are not correct (so, supposedly not according to the Catechism of the Catholic Church)??Can you please cite it?In your case you're citing a Vatican II general document (Nostra Aetate 3, October 28, 1965) that is NOT DOGMATIC... e.g. Lumen Gentium is a Dogmatic Constitution of Vatican II. It is important to remember that in the Church Magisterial teaching, pastoral documents are not as binding to the faithful, as dogmatic documents. Anyway, a detailed expose of the Vat II on Muslims (not 'Islam' by the way) can be reached here: http://answering-islam.org/Hoaxes/vatican2.html

Now, on the issue of Charlie being 'insult-full', disrespectful, etc. to Muslims (not Islam, by the way):- The Catholic Faith borders on very vast and distinct issues, that can 'overlap'. One of them is about 'just war' and the right to 'self-defence'. We have now a FACTUAL situation on the middle east where a self-proclaimed ISIS Caliphate is killing Christians by purpose and design. In case our readers haven't noticed, there is a war out there. We should love our enemies, pray for them but we also have a right to self-defence (see http://www.catholiclane.com/the-catechism-on-the-right-of-self-defense/ ). And ISIS is doing that on the name of Islam and Allah, it is not on the guise of terrorism, political parties, nationhood, etc... they declared war to Christians in Syria, Iraq and other places. We have a fact and the morals related to it must be addressed with that in mind, not a general declaration of good principles, which by the way I'm certain everyone agrees with, including me.

I don't see how Charlie is being disrespectful when he says that there will be a larger confrontation or War with Islam some point in the future... IT IS A FACT ALREADY HAPPENING, there is a war now between Muslims and Christians in the Middle East, this regional war is not between Syria & Iraq or the Curds, it is between a group that performs religious ethnic cleansing (which is by the way a GRAVE SIN). Charlie has prophetised that this clash might go a bit more global. So, my point is that Charlie's sentences must be morally judge from the point of view of the just war and self-defence doctrines standing and not under Nostra Aetate assertions, BECAUSE Charlie is not making a doctrinal affirmation but a referring to a future fact (that actually is happening on the Middle East). Also he has been respectful to Muslim beliefs when he says: "[...]while recognizing the longing of most Muslims for God."By the way, canonised saints of the Catholic Church - like St. Hildegard von Bingen, which has been made Doctor of the Church - have also prophetised a clash between Islam and the west in what they called 'the end times', even Nostradamus got it also. A fact is a fact: it is not an insult, a disrespect or contempt.

(cont)Lastly, I sometimes wonder how people read in prophecy something that the prophet actually never said and go ranting about it. It is an error of interpretation of a given prophecy. I'll give another example with poor Charlie. Someone said - either on this blog or on Charlie's The Next Right Step - that he now predicted that President Obama will not end his mandate. For God sake, the man NEVER said that... 'that' is an interpretation of a reader. The man said something like [not literal] 'the authority in charge will not fulfil his mandate'. That is not = Obama will not finish his mandate. Obama might die (heart attack, killed, etc) and Joe Biden assume... also the Storm will go deeply into 2017... so, you have elections on the US in 2016... can one guarantee that this does not refer to the elected man in 2016??? - Too much virtual reality has now impaired people's ability to reasoning??

The same applies to me when I said that Jesus condemns sin.. this doesn't imply that I'm saying 'being a Muslim is a sin', it is not! - This is again a wrong interpretation (what a pity that Logic has been taken out from school curricula). I said that to show how clearly and quickly in Our Lord's mind ('mind of Christ') condemnation of SIN was immediate and clear as crystal: Christ correct people BECAUSE that was the charitable thing to do at that moment with them. Another classic example of the Master's [respectful to established authority] attitude was 'Do what they say, but not what they do'.

Well... enough. I'm now going to pray my daily Rosary, may be also for all people in this post, Charlie including. How many of Charlie's detractors here have said a single Rosary for him? - Or for the Muslims alike. See... in the end this is what matters. Praying solves almost everything, having arguments changes nothing. Bye...God Bless!

Why are Catholics following this man? Forget about self proclaimed mystics please. They are a dime a dozen and loving all the attention that silly people shower on them hoping that they will have some insight into the future.. It's very much like fortune telling only they put a religious twist to suck gullible people in. Like the saying says "Come in spinner".(Aussie talk). If you are a faithful Catholic you have nothing to fear your future will be bright.

Father Charles Arminjon, who wrote The End of the Present Life and the Mysteries of the Future Life, wrote: "Steer clear of every perilous opinion, relying neither upon dubious revelations nor upon apocryphal prophecies, and making no assertion that is not justified by the doctrine of the Fathers and of Tradition."

Father Benedict Groeschel lists seven short cuts that speed up the discernment process in his classic book A Still Small Voice. Three of these can be applied to Charlie's messages.

An obvious attitude on the part of the alleged visionary which is defiant, proud, judgmental or provocative is enough to dismiss the alleged report. Charlie is not defiant or provocative, but he certainly has come off as proud and judgmental in some of his writings.

Erroneous prophecy, when it is given to support the supposed revelation, is a good sign that one is dealing with something less than the power of God. All one has to see here is the failed Christmas 2013 is the last normal Christmas prophecy.

The individual who has received the revelation should be open to the possibility of self-deception. The failure to do so may suggest paranoia. Charlie has alluded to this, but he cites his high success rate with his prophecies. Also telling is his subtle insisting in the comments that "But before you tell me I am blowing something along this line out of proportion you really ought to wait until I have actually been wrong one time in my assessment. In reality, I have occasionally been wrong...", "some secular commentators and religious analysts have caught up somewhat with what I was saying from the beginning. Perhaps they will catch up with me on that soon enough, too. But I am convinced that that is largely why I have such a booming audience these days.", etc.

Honestly, in times like these, it's wiser and safer to listen to the Pope and the bishops than chasing after dubious visions.

FolksI'm not answering no one... A criteria I have for accessing the veracity of a given content in prophetic messages is to check independent sources, both 'supernatural' and 'profane'. Satan is a liar but he always wraps his poison very well under some layers of truth, so if you sift everything, the common content or patterns usually has a weight on itself.

Well, this is for letting you know... I follow these Locutions for 3 years - everything I read there came to be, including the Conclave in 2013 and the profile of the new Pontiff, revolution in Syria, terrorism striking Europe in 2015, etc, etc - and now I just read this (for you to discern) but it agrees with Charlie's interpretation of the beginning of the Storm in Fall:Source: www.locutions.org/2015/09/3-the-popes-visit-and-the-collapse/

"3. The Pope’s Visit and the CollapseBy Editor On 09/03/2015 · Add Comment

Mary

I cannot say that the economic collapse is distant when really it is near, or that it will be short when really it will be long, or that it will be easy, when really it will be quite difficult. Only truth gives the light needed for hope. So, I will now speak words of truth.

This collapse has been a long time in coming, preceded by many incidents that should have awakened the world. God is not the cause of the collapse and the collapse is not a divine chastisement. The collapse comes because of man’s free will and the choices he has made. The collapse has no purpose. It results from purposeless decisions made from self-interest.

The collapse will not come before Pope Francis comes to America but it will happen while he is in America. I deliberately brought the Pope to America, the world’s financial center, to be here when it takes place. I want him to be part of the picture. I want him to be present. His presence in America will be my sign that the Church is very important in saving mankind from its own follies. Toward the end of his trip, he will have to shift his message and address the new world situation. In this way, I will begin to exalt the Church as a beacon of light in the darkness.

During September, Congress will be voting on the Iran treaty. Terrorism and economic difficulties are the twin evils which will mark the years ahead. All of these good and evil forces, papacy, economic collapse and nuclear war will be merged in a single unforgettable moment, as they all come together in September, 2015."

Comment: This is an extraordinary locution."

Note: these Locutions had the supervision and 'sifting' of Mons. John Esseff (one of Mother Teresa spiritual directors), but from 2014 on the mention to him just vanished from the website, so I guess he isn't any more the spiritual director of the seer and I ignore if SHE has another.

Go to the search facility and type 'economic collapse': this will give you a hint on how many locutions in 2014 and especially 2015 talk of a decisive economic event in the end of the year... so, I was not surprised with Charlie's forecast at all. I read about it in 'www.locutions.org' as far back as January 2015This is what you get:http://www.locutions.org/?s=economic+collapse

I would just like to point out that those interested in reading the most recent comments on this article on Charlie Johnston will need to click on the "Newest" link beneath this comment, because this website lists comments in 200 per page, and this post marks the 199th.-Glenn Dallaire

Abortion Stops a Beating Heart

Contact

Translate/Traducir

Obedience to the Church

"Why do you talk to me as if I am so far away? I am very near....in your heart.""Ask Me for love. Ask Me; I am burning with desire to give it to you""Talk to Me. For Me there is no sweeter prayer"-Words of our Lord to Gabrielle Bossis.